The Cross, the Vinegar, and the Sponge on Stick

LadyEagle · Apr 1, 2012

Recently watched a History Channel presentaton on the trash/sewer systems of the Ancient Roman Empire. They were discussing public toilets that had running water and a trough of running water in front of them where they kept sponges on sticks for cleansing. The next day I woke up and was thinking about the sponge on the stick and vinegar given to Jesus while on the cross, wondering if there was any correlation, since I have never heard anything preached about this. I found this video on the web and am interested in your thoughts. Is this possible? Is this probable? When put into perspective of the customs of the times, it poses an interesting perspective. Was the vinegar given to Jesus as an act of kindness or humanitarian motives? Now in thinking about this, the Romans were known for being cruel, so that doesn't seem to fit. What are your thoughts?

From Wikipedia: "A system of thirteen aqueducts provided the inhabitants of Rome with water of varying quality, the best being reserved for potable supplies. Poorer-quality water was used in the public baths and in the latrines, which were an early form of toilet. Latrine systems have been found in many places, such as Housesteads, a Roman fort on Hadrian's Wall, in Pompeii, Herculaneum, and elsewhere that flushed waste away with a stream of water. Romans used sea sponges on sticks after defecation."

The video is here: http://davemiers.com/2009/09/24/filfthy-roman-sponge/

ChristianLady1978 · Apr 1, 2012

Wow. I never knew that sponges on a stick and vinegar were Roman toilet paper. If that is what was offered to Jesus....yuck. It would go along with the other abuse and humiliation that he suffered while on the cross though, like the crown of thorns and the mocking.

But, as we know :godisgood:

Deacon · Apr 1, 2012

Here's some trivia regarding early Israel's toileting traditions

Rob

Utilization of Stones to Clean Up after Defecating

1. III:2: Zonin went into the house of study. He said to them, "My lords, what is the requisite size of stones used in the toilet for removing sh**?" They said to him, "The size of an olive, a nut, and an egg." He said to him, "So are we going to have to take into the toilet a balance to know the proper volume of the stones?" They took a vote and decided that the requisite measure was simply a handful.

a. III:3: Tannaite complement to the foregoing.

2. III:4: It has been taught on Tannaite authority: On the Sabbath it is permitted to take along three rounded pebbles into the privy. Such a privy has no walls, and ordinarily one could not carry an object into it.

a. III:5: Gloss.

3. III:6: Said R. Judah, "But not with a brittle stone."

4. III:7: Said Raba, "On the Sabbath it is forbidden to utilize a chip as a suppository in the way in which one does so on weekdays."

5. III:8: Said R. Yannai, "If the privy has a fixed location, one may bring in a handful of stones; if not, only a stone the size of the leg of a small spice mortar may be brought in."

a. III:9: Gloss of a detail of the foregoing: Said Abbayye to R. Joseph, "If rain fell on it and the stain was washed away, what’s the law?"

6. III:10: Rabbah bar R. Shila asked R. Hisda, "What is the law as to bringing up stones after himself to the roof?" He said to him, "The honor owing to human beings is so considerable that it overrides the negatives of the Torah." One may do so.

7. III:11: Said R. Huna, "It is forbidden on the Sabbath to take a sh** in a ploughed field."

a. III:12: Gloss of foregoing.

i. III:13: Extension of foregoing.

8. III:14: Said R. Yohanan, "On the Sabbath it is forbidden to wipe oneself with a sherd."

a. III:15: Amplification of foregoing.

i. III:16: Extension of foregoing.

A. III:17: Why these are religious matters.

9. III:18: If before someone were a pebble and a sherd—R. Huna said, "He wipes himself with the pebble and he doesn’t dry himself with the sherd." And R. Hisda said, "He wipes himself with the sherd and he doesn’t dry himself with a pebble."

10. III:19: If before someone were a pebble and grass—R. Hisda and R. Hamnuna—One said, "One wipes himself with a pebble and doesn’t wipe himself with grass." The other said, "He wipes himself with grass and doesn’t wipe himself with a pebble."

11. III:20: He who has to take a *** but doesn’t do it—R. Hisda and Rabina One said, "He smells like a fart." The other said, "He smells like sh**."

12. III:21: He who has to take a sh** but can’t—Said R. Hisda, "Let him stand up and sit down again, stand up and sit down again." R. Hanan of Nehardea said, "Let him shift from side to side." R. Hamnuna said, "Let him fiddle around with a pebble on the an**us."

13. III:22: Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: He who comes into a house to take a regular meal should first walk ten lengths of four cubits—others say, four of ten—and take a sh** and then go in and sit in his regular place.

Neusner, Jacob. The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2011
Click to expand...

LadyEagle · Apr 2, 2012

Thanks, Rob. (it was quite graphic!!) I did some research and there have been discovered Roman baths in Jerusalem at the time of Christ. Remembering that Jerusalem was under Roman rule at the time of the Crucifixion, the above explanation in the video seems plausible to me. We can never know how much our Lord suffered for our sins.....

billwald · Apr 2, 2012

This is the exact sort of exchange that occurs on BB!!!!!! Which Bible, which denomination, which kind of Baptist denomination, which Bible interpretation, which size of stone to wipe one's . . . In other words, we are all pharisees.

billwald · Apr 2, 2012

And why are some "Biblical" words banned in BB? After all, the KJV defines "male" as one who pisses on a wall. Look it up for yourselves. Hint:Strongs.

Melanie · Apr 6, 2012

I too have read that about Roman hygiene but have never thought that as part of the Passion of Our Lord. I was taught that hyssop was on the sponge rather than vinegar and it was offered as an anaesthetic type of thing, or it may have been a poison....so in a sense a type of mercy.

Jesus had bled profusely from His beating and not eaten since the Last Supper so He would have been hideously dehydrated.

The fact that Christ rejected it would have helped reduce the suffering which was in fact His mission on Earth. He emptied himself out for our redemption.

The Cross, the Vinegar, and the Sponge on Stick

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

ChristianLady1978 New Member

Deacon Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

billwald New Member

billwald New Member

Melanie Active Member
Site Supporter

Useful Searches

The Cross, the Vinegar, and the Sponge on Stick

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

ChristianLady1978 New Member

Deacon Well-Known Member Site Supporter

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

billwald New Member

billwald New Member

Melanie Active Member Site Supporter

Deacon Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Melanie Active Member
Site Supporter