Who helped carry the cross of Jesus Christ to Calvary?

In the New Testament, among many different characters, a certain Simon of Cyrene is mentioned, who was forced by Roman legionnaires to help Jesus Christ carry the cross to Golgotha. Against the background of numerous miracles, parables, healings, resurrections from the dead and prophecies of the Savior, his role seems insignificant, but this is not so, otherwise three out of four evangelists would not have mentioned him (Matthew 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26).

Why did the Savior not carry the cross himself?

Photo: Allpainter.com
Two robbers were sentenced to death along with Jesus Christ. They were led to Golgotha together with the Savior. According to custom, a criminal sentenced to a shameful and cruel execution carried his own cross to the place of crucifixion, so their crosses were placed on the shoulders of three men in the praetorium.

The Praetorium is a room with all its annexes that was occupied by the Roman ruler. In the context of the Gospel - the courtyard before the judgment seat (Mark 15:16).

The next day was Passover (Jewish), which is why the rejoicing Sanhedrin and the crowd of people hurried to the place of the crucifixion in order to return home before the holiday. But, exhausted by moral torment, sleepless night, thirst, cruel scourging, bullying of soldiers and crowds, Christ quickly became weak under the weight (about 100 kg) of the cross and began to fall. Fearing that Jesus would die before reaching Calvary or that the time of execution would coincide with the beginning of the holiday (in the evening, according to tradition, they already ate Easter), the high priests told the Roman centurion to order the Lord to be freed from bearing the cross.

Ninth Station of the Cross

Jesus falls for the third time

The earth sank under His weight. She could not stand the God-man, Who loved people so much that, sinless, He took upon Himself the burden of their sins.

The earth shook under His weight when He, exhausted and dying, fell on it for the third time!

The stones cried out. The dust cried bitter tears. The blackness of the fertile soil, hidden under a layer of dust and stones, lovingly covered Him with its cool mantle.

But His hour has not yet come. They pulled him away and, putting him on his feet, drove him further, although this was unnecessary: He was hurried by love, and only love led Him to the holy mountain - to death!

Why was Simon forced to carry the cross?

Photo: Thinglink.com
None of the huge crowd of people would voluntarily agree to bear the cross, because it was considered a shame. The holy apostles Matthew, Mark and Luke emphasize that Simon did not bear the cross of Jesus of his own free will. At the exit from the city (the place of execution was located outside the city walls), Roman soldiers grabbed him and placed the instrument of death on him.

Some interpreters of the Gospel believe that the soldiers grabbed the first person they came across, but this is not so. Therefore, the soldiers were delighted to see Simon, who fit all the necessary parameters:

“Cyrenean” - that is, the man was from (or arrived from) Cyrene or Cyrene, a city located in Libya (Africa). It is unlikely that a Roman or Jew would agree to cover himself with shame; he would rather suffer a couple of lashes as punishment for refusal or simply run away;
He was returning from the field, probably from work, therefore he was physically strong and could carry a heavy cross;
John Bengel puts forward the opinion that Simon was a follower of the Savior. And he showed compassion for Jesus, which the Roman soldiers noticed.

Among the interpreters of the Gospel, there is an opinion that Simon’s meeting with Jesus Christ took place according to the providence of God. The Savior, even in the last minutes of His earthly life, cared about the salvation of human souls. It is possible that Simon, whose two sons were already Christians (Mark 15:21), lacked the impetus to gain faith, so it was he who was forced to bear the cross.

Following the discussions
: Contradictions in the Bible,
conversation eight

This series of conversations

deals with seeming contradictions in the Bible. Note: not contradictions, but apparent or imaginary contradictions. For centuries, opponents of God and His Word have been trying their best to look for contradictions in the Holy Scriptures, but they can never find them. Our discussions about contradictions in the Bible will help you understand that there are no such things in the Bible.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 63

King Herod thought that Jesus was the resurrected John the Baptist: Matthew 14:1-2

At that time Herod the tetrarch heard the report of Jesus and said to those serving with him, “This is John the Baptist;

He rose from the dead, and therefore miracles were done by him

Mark 6:14-16

When King Herod heard about Jesus—for His name had become known—he said, “It is John the Baptist who has risen from the dead, and therefore miracles are done by him.”

Others said: this is Elijah, and others said: this is a prophet, or like one of the prophets.

When Herod heard it, he said, “This is John, whom I beheaded;

he rose from the dead

King Herod did not think so: Luke 9:9

And Herod said: I have beheaded John;

Who is this one about whom I hear such things?

And I sought to see Him

Contradiction

Explanation
: If you read the New Testament carefully and be completely honest, you can easily see that the Gospel of Luke does not say that King Herod did not think that Jesus was the resurrected John the Baptist.
The Gospel of Luke mentions the idea that Jesus is the resurrected John the Baptist: Luke 9:7-8
“
And Herod the tetrarch heard all that Jesus had done, and was perplexed: for some said that it was John who rose from the dead;
others that Elijah appeared, and others that one of the ancient prophets was resurrected .”
Most likely, Herod adhered to this version. The Gospels of Matthew and Mark support this. We also invite you to read the answer to the question “Who is Jesus Christ?”
APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 64

Untruthfulness of testimony: John 5:31

If I testify of Myself, My testimony is not true

The truth of the testimony: John 8:14

If I testify of Myself, My testimony is true

Contradiction

Explanation
: To understand that these two phrases are not a contradiction, it is necessary to look at the context of each of these phrases.
First passage: John 5:30-40
“
I can do nothing of Myself.
As I hear, I judge, and My judgment is righteous; For I do not seek My will, but the will of the Father who sent Me. If I testify about Myself, then My testimony is not true. There is another who testifies of Me; and I know that the testimony with which he testifies about Me is true. You sent to John, and he testified to the truth. However, I do not accept testimony from man, but I say this so that you may be saved. He was a lamp, burning and shining; and you wanted to rejoice in its light for a little while. But I have a testimony greater than John: for the works that the Father gave Me to do, these very works that I have done, testify of Me that the Father has sent Me. And the Father who sent Me testified about Me. But you have never heard His voice, nor seen His face; and you do not have His word abiding in you, because you do not believe Him whom He sent. Search the Scriptures, for through them you think you have eternal life; and they testify of Me. But you do not want to come to Me to have life .” In the first passage, Jesus refers to the Old Testament Law that one cannot judge on the basis of one piece of evidence, but to reach a decision or verdict in a court of law one must have at least two witnesses or testimonies. In this passage, Jesus lists all the witnesses who testify about Him as the Son of God and the promised Messiah: - First, this is the testimony of John the Baptist (verse 33); - secondly, these are the works and miracles of Jesus Christ himself (verse 36); - thirdly, this is the testimony of Heavenly Father (verse 37); - fourthly, - this is the testimony of the scriptures (verse 39). The main idea is that Jesus' testimony about himself is not the only testimony that was given to the Jews. And the unbelief of the Jews is explained by nothing other than ignorance of the Holy Scriptures and unwillingness to accept the fact that Jesus is the Son of God and the promised Messiah.

Second passage: John 8:12-14

“
Again Jesus spoke to the people and said to them: I am the light of the world;
whoever follows Me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life. Then the Pharisees said to Him: You testify about Yourself, Your testimony is not true. Jesus answered and said to them: If I testify of Myself, My testimony is true; because I know where I came from and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from or where I am going .”
Notice that here Jesus did not say, “Yes, I testify of Myself.” But He said: “If I testify about Myself...” And these are two different things. It is interesting that the Pharisees, to whom Jesus literally recently (namely in the 5th chapter) listed all those who testify about Him, accused Jesus of testifying about Himself. Significant in the answer of Jesus Christ is His statement that He has the right to testify about Himself. Jesus' response in this passage is nothing more than a direct challenge to the Pharisees, in which Jesus said: “ If I testify of Myself, My testimony is true;
because I know where I came from and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from or where I am going .”
Why does Jesus have such power and authority that he has the right to testify about Himself? The answer is found in the words of Jesus: “ For I know where I came from and where I am going;
but you do not know where I come from or where I am going .” Only God knows the past, present and future. Only the Lord God can say about himself that He knows where He came from and where He is going. Thus, if we paraphrase Jesus’ answer to the Pharisees, He told them the following about Himself: “Even if I testified about Myself, I have the right to do so, because I am God.”

There is no contradiction between the phrases of Jesus Christ in these passages. Instead, the first passage (John 5:30-40) is the context for the second passage (John 8:12-14). And this once again proves the truth that the Bible must be read not in fragments and snatches, taking phrases out of context, but as a whole book.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 65

Jesus carried His cross to Calvary: John 19:17

And carrying His cross, He went out to a place called the Skull, in Hebrew Calvary

Jesus did not carry His cross to Calvary: Matthew 27:31-32

And when they had mocked Him, they took off His scarlet robe, and clothed Him with His own garments, and led Him away to be crucified.

As they went out, they met one Cyrene man named Simon;

this one was forced to bear His cross

Contradiction

Explanation
: To answer this question, you need to know how the procedure for the conviction and crucifixion of the criminal took place.
Barclay's comment: “ The crucifixion has always been performed the same way.
After the case was heard and the criminal was sentenced, the judge uttered the fateful phrase: “Ibisad krusem - You will go to the cross.” The sentence was carried out immediately: the criminal was placed in the center between four soldiers, a cross was placed on his shoulders. Flagellation usually preceded execution, so you can imagine what state the criminal's body was in. Sometimes they whipped him along the way to the place of execution and urged him to remain on his feet until the end, until his crucifixion .”
So, according to tradition, the condemned man himself had to carry his cross, or at least the crossbar, to the place of execution. The three Gospels tell that the Romans forced Simon of Cyrene to bear the cross of Jesus. Most likely, they had to resort to this measure because Jesus was very weak after the cruel scourging. We must not forget that Jesus spent a sleepless night in the courtyard of the high priest, where the guards laughed and mocked Him. Reading about Jesus' procession, it becomes obvious that Simon had no intention of carrying anyone's cross that day. He was returning from the field when he was met by a procession moving towards Calvary: Mark 15:20-21
“
And when they had mocked Him, they took off His scarlet robe, clothed Him in His own garments, and led Him away to crucify Him.
And they forced a certain Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus, who was passing by, coming from the field, to carry His cross .”
Did Jesus carry his cross as the Gospel of John states? Most likely, a cross was placed on him, like any other criminal doomed to crucifixion. But very quickly, already at the exit from the gate, the Romans realized that Jesus himself would not be able to carry the cross to the place of execution. And then they ordered the first person they met to carry the cross of Jesus: Matthew 27:31-32
“
And when they had mocked Him, they took off the scarlet robe from Him, and clothed Him with His own garments, and led Him away to be crucified.
As they went out, they met one Cyrene man named Simon; this one was forced to bear His cross .”

So we have found an explanation for Matthew 27:31-32

, which tells that the cross of Jesus Christ was carried by Simon of Cyrene.
What about the passage from John 19:17
, which says that Jesus came to the Place of Execution (Golgotha) carrying his cross? If Simon carried the cross of Jesus, then why does the Evangelist John claim that Jesus himself carried his own cross? The fact is that, according to the law, the execution area (the execution site) was cordoned off by soldiers, ready, if anything happened, to repel the attack of those who might have decided to repel the criminal condemned to crucifixion. For the same reason, no one except soldiers and convicts had the right to cross the cordon line. Perhaps in connection with this, Simon of Cyrene, who carried the cross of Jesus, was not allowed to bring the cross of Jesus to the place of execution, because the entire mountain was cordoned off by Roman soldiers. Therefore, Jesus himself carried his cross to Calvary, as the Apostle John testified to.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 66

The words of the centurion after the death of Jesus Christ in accordance with Luke 23:47

When the centurion saw what was happening, he glorified God and said, “Truly this man was a righteous man

The words of the centurion after the death of Jesus Christ in accordance with Mark 15:39

The centurion who stood opposite Him, seeing that He had thus cried, gave up the ghost, said: Truly this man was the Son of God

Contradiction

Explanation
: It is quite possible that the centurion said both phrases.
In all likelihood, what happened shook him to the core and prompted him to recognize Jesus not only as a righteous man, but also as the Son of God. In addition, one should not lose sight of the passage from the Gospel of Matthew describing the death of Jesus: Matthew 27:54
“
And the centurion and those who were with him guarding Jesus, seeing the earthquake and all that happened, were greatly afraid and said, “Truly this was the Son of God.”
" This verse shows that the centurion was not the only person at the cross of Jesus who recognized Jesus as the Son of God. It would be legitimate to assume that the death of Jesus on the cross caused a wide resonance among the Roman soldiers who were at Calvary, who discussed what happened for a long time, expressing their guesses and assumptions regarding the crucified Jesus Christ. People who witnessed the death of Jesus (among whom were Christ's disciples) saw and heard the general reaction of the Roman soldiers, which was reflected in different Gospels in different ways.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 67

The Apostle Paul declares that he is not a people pleaser: Galatians 1:10

Do I now seek favor from men, or from God?

Do I try to please people?

If I were still pleasing people, I would not be a servant of Christ

The Apostle Paul says about himself that he pleases all people: 1 Corinthians 10:33

... just as I please everyone in everything, seeking not my own benefit, but the benefit of many, that they may be saved

Contradiction

Explanation
: To answer this very interesting question, it is necessary to carefully read the contexts of each passage.
What is the context of the verse in 1 Corinthians? 1 Corinthians 10:33
“
Do not cause offense either to Jews or to Greeks, or to the church of God, just as I also please everyone in everything, seeking not my own benefit, but the benefit of many, that they may be saved
.”
The main idea and context of this passage is stated in verse 24: 1 Corinthians 10:24
“
No one seeks his own, but each one seeks the benefit of another
.”
Here we are talking about the fact that a Christian must please his brothers in faith for the sake of their salvation. So, in the first passage, the Apostle Paul raises the question of who to please: yourself or people. And Paul chooses to give up himself and his personal gain for the sake of people and their salvation. As for the passage from Galatians 1:10
, the question that the Apostle Paul raises in it is who to please:
God
or
people
?
The Apostle Paul answers this question unequivocally - to God: “ Do I now seek favor from people, or from God?
Do I try to please people? If I were still pleasing people, I would not be a servant of Christ .”

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 68

When the disciples saw Jesus walking on the water, they glorified Jesus: Matthew 14:33

And those who were in the boat came and worshiped Him and said, “Truly You are the Son of God

When the disciples saw Jesus walking on the water, they were amazed, for they did not understand: Mark 6:51-52

And he entered into a boat with them, and the wind ceased.

And they were exceedingly amazed and amazed, for they did not understand the miracle of the loaves, because their hearts were hardened

Controversy

Explanation
: Let's start by noting that this was not the first reaction of the disciples to the sight of Jesus walking on the water.
The first reaction is described in the mentioned Gospels as follows: Matthew 14:25-27
“
Now in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went to them, walking on the sea.
And the disciples, seeing Him walking on the sea, were alarmed and said: this is a ghost; and they cried out in fear. But Jesus immediately spoke to them and said, “Be of good cheer; It is I, do not be afraid .”
Mark 7:46-50
“
At evening the boat was in the middle of the sea, and He was alone on the land.
And I saw them in distress on the voyage, because the wind was against them; About the fourth watch of the night he approached them, walking on the sea, and wanted to pass them. When they saw Him walking on the sea, they thought it was a ghost and cried out. For everyone saw Him and were afraid. And immediately he spoke to them and said to them, “Be of good cheer; It is I, do not be afraid .”
As these passages show, the disciples' first reaction was fear. What happened next? The Gospel of Matthew
says that when Jesus entered the boat, the disciples worshiped Him and recognized Him as the true Son of God.
And the Gospel of Mark says that they were simply surprised at what happened, but did not proclaim Jesus the Son of God, “ for they did not understand the miracle of the loaves
.” How to explain two such contradictory reactions? Which evangelical is right? The fact is that Matthew wrote in his Gospel what the disciples said to Jesus when they saw Him walking on water. And Mark in his Gospel described what they felt. Yes, according to the Gospel of Matthew, the disciples worshiped Christ, recognizing Him as the Son of God, but (as we learn from the Gospel of Mark) at the same time they continued to doubt, for their hearts were stony. And this is not surprising. People often think and feel one thing, but say another. Reading the Gospel, we see how the disciples often asked Jesus stupid questions, argued with each other over trifles, and did not understand much of what Jesus said and did. But after the resurrection of Jesus Christ and after the descent of the Holy Spirit on them, they became completely different people - people born again, who no longer doubted the Divinity of Jesus Christ and were ready to die for Him (and many did die) as martyrdom.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 69

According to the Gospel of Mark

Mark 1:9-13

And it came to pass in those days that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized by John in the Jordan.

And when he came out of the water, John immediately saw the heavens opening and the Spirit like a dove descending on Him.

And a voice came from heaven: You are my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Immediately after this, the Spirit leads Him into the wilderness.

And He was there in the wilderness for forty days, tempted by Satan, and was with the beasts;

and Angels ministered to Him

According to the Gospel of John

John 1:35-37

The next day John and two of his disciples stood again.

And when he saw Jesus coming, he said, Behold the Lamb of God.

When both disciples heard these words from him, they followed Jesus

John 1:43-45

The next day Jesus wanted to go to Galilee, and he found Philip and said to him, “Follow me.”

Philip was from Bethsaida, from the same city as Andrew and Peter.

Philip finds Nathanael and says to him, “We have found the one about whom Moses in the law and the prophets wrote, Jesus the son of Joseph from Nazareth

John 2:1-2

On the third day there was a wedding in Canna of Galilee, and the Mother of Jesus was there.

Jesus and His disciples were also invited to marriage

Contradiction

Explanation
: Let's look at this contradiction.
The Gospel of Mark tells that Jesus immediately after his baptism went into the desert to be tempted by the Devil. By the way, the Gospels of Matthew and Luke tell the same story: Luke 4:1
“
Jesus, filled with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness
.”
Matthew 4:1
“
Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil
.”
What about the Gospel of John, which tells a slightly different sequence of events? At first glance it may seem that there is indeed a contradiction here. But this is a misconception. The passage from the Gospel of John does not use the expression “ ho hexes hemera
” - the next (literally) day, but “
ho epaurion
” - another time, another day.
Moreover, “another day” is not necessarily the day immediately following the previous one. It could be any other day. If we consider that the Gospel of John omits the story of the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness, then we can assume that in time this occurs between verses 34 and 35. And when verse 35 says that “the next day” John saw Jesus again, then this may mean that John saw Jesus again after he returned from the desert. It would be more correct to translate this expression with the phrase “next time” or “another time.” Then the passage we are examining from the Gospel of John should sound like this: John 1:35-37
“
Another time John and two of his disciples stood again.
And when he saw Jesus coming, he said, Behold the Lamb of God. When both disciples heard these words from him, they followed Jesus .”
In general, the Apostle John is characterized by the use of the expression “ ho epaurion
,” which can be used both in the direct meaning of “the next day” and in the meaning of “any other subsequent day” or “another time.”

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 70

One Gospel says that the name of the disciple who was a publican (tax collector) is Matthew: Matthew 9:9

As Jesus passed from there, he saw a man sitting at the tax collector named Matthew, and said to him, “Follow Me.” .

And he arose and followed Him

Another Gospel says that the name of the disciple who was a publican (tax collector) is Levi: Mark 2:14

As He passed by, He saw Levi Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector, and said to him: Follow Me.

And he stood up and followed Him

Luke 5:27-28

After this Jesus went out and saw a tax collector named Levi sitting at the tax office, and he said to him, “Follow Me.”

And he, leaving everything, stood up and followed Him

Contradiction

Explanation
: Levi is the Hebrew name of the Apostle Matthew. Since Levi worked for the Roman government (after all, he was a tax collector, that is, a tax inspector), he simply had to have a Greek name. For the Romans he was Matthew, for the Jews he was Levi Alpheus.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 71

In one Gospel, the name of the tenth disciple of Jesus Christ is Thaddeus: Matthew 10:1-4

And having called His twelve disciples, He gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out and to heal every disease and every disease.

The names of the twelve Apostles are these: the first Simon, called Peter, and Andrew his brother, James the Zebedee and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, James Alphaeus and Levbeus, called Thaddeus, Simon the Canaanite and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him

In another Gospel, the name of this disciple of Christ is Judas Jacob: Luke 6:13-16

When the day had come, he called his disciples and chose twelve from them, whom he named apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter, and Andrew, his brother him, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas, James Alphaeus and Simon, called the Zealot, Judas Jacob and Judas Iscariot, who later became a traitor

Controversy

Explanation
: To begin with, both the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke were written by two of the 12 closest disciples of Jesus Christ.
It is hard to imagine that they suddenly forgot or misspelled the name of one of the 12 with whom they ate, drank, slept and worked for three years. The fact is that many students had more than one name. In this case we are talking about Thaddeus, aka Judah Jacob, aka Levway. This is also evidenced by the list of disciples in the Gospel of Mark 3:13-19
“
Then He went up to the mountain and called to Him whom He Himself wanted;
and came to Him. And he appointed twelve of them to be with Him and to send them to preach, and so that they would have the power to heal diseases and cast out demons; appointed Simon, calling his name Peter, James Zebedee, and John, the brother of James, calling them Boanerges, that is, “sons of thunder,” Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James Alpheus, Thaddeus, Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who and betrayed Him ."

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 72

In one place it is said that Jesus, when sending out the disciples to preach, allowed them to take a staff on the road: Mark 6:7-9

And he called the twelve, and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over unclean spirits.

And he commanded them not to take anything on the road except one staff: no bag, no bread, no copper in the belt, but to put on simple shoes and not wear two clothes

Elsewhere it is said that Jesus, when sending his disciples to preach, forbade them to take a staff on the road: Matthew 10:9-10

Take with you neither gold, nor silver, nor copper for your belts, nor scrip for the road, nor two coats, neither sandals, nor staff, for the worker is worthy of food

Luke 9:3

And he said to them, “Take nothing for the road: neither staff, nor scrip, nor bread, nor silver, and you shall not have two coats

Controversy

Explanation
: If you look at every word of Jesus, then you can just as well say that in
Mark 6:7-9
He allowed the disciples to put on shoes, saying: “
to put on simple sandals
”;
and in Matthew 10:9-10
- he forbade it, saying “
do not take with you... any shoes
.” In fact, Jesus warned His disciples to go on a missionary journey as is: in the clothes and shoes they were wearing, without preparation or supplies. As for the staff, whoever has it can take it with him; and whoever does not have a staff, let him go without it. In addition, knowing from the Gospels that Jesus was a sensitive and sentimental person in some matters, it can be assumed that Jesus Christ said goodbye to each pair of disciples individually. Therefore, He could give individual instructions to each couple. Jesus was not a literalist and a bureaucrat, like one who seeks contradictions in His words. Therefore, it is quite possible that those disciples who had staves before the missionary journey, He allowed them to take them with them on the road, while He told other disciples (who did not have staves with them) to go on the journey without them .

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 73

One Gospel says that Jesus is a descendant of Solomon (son of David): Matthew 1:6

Jesse begat David a king;

David the king begot Solomon from the one who was behind Uriah...

Another Gospel says that Jesus is a descendant of Nathan (David's dream): Luke 3:31

...Nathan, David

Controversy

Explanation
: The person who asked this question did not pay attention to the first three chapters of the Gospel of Luke.
In the first chapter, Luke talks about how Mary was a virgin betrothed to Joseph. Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus, but he was His adapted father: Luke 1:26-27
“
Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David. ;
the name of the Virgin is Mary.” Luke 1:34-35 “Mary said to the angel: How will this be, since I do not know the husband?
The angel answered Her: The Holy Spirit will come upon You, and the power of the Most High will overshadow You; therefore the Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God .” In the third chapter, before beginning the genealogy of Jesus, Luke makes a small disclaimer: Luke 3:23
“
Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years old, and was, as they thought, the Son of Joseph
.” Indeed, many thought that Jesus was the son of Joseph (Mary's husband). And that is why, in accordance with the genealogy of Mary, described in the Gospel of Luke, Jesus was a descendant of Nathan, the son of King David. And according to the genealogy of Joseph given in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus was a descendant of Solomon.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 74

In one Gospel, the name of Joseph’s father (Mary’s husband) is Jacob: Matthew 1:16

Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ

In another Gospel, the name of Joseph’s father (Mary’s husband) is Eli: Luke 3:23

When Jesus began His ministry, he was about thirty years old, and was, as they thought, the Son of Joseph, Eli

Contradiction

Explanation
: It must be taken into account that the Gospel of Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph (Mary's husband).
Therefore it says: “ Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ
” (
Matthew 1:16
).
The Gospel of Luke gives the genealogy of Mary, the wife of Joseph, where her father is indicated, the father-in-law of Joseph (Mary’s husband): Luke 3:23
“
Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years old, and was, as they thought, the Son of Joseph, Eli
.”

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 75

In one place it is said that Saul committed suicide by falling on his own sword: 1 Samuel 31:1-6

And the Philistines fought against Israel, and the men of Israel fled from the Philistines and fell slain on Mount Gilboa.

And the Philistines overtook Saul and his sons, and the Philistines killed Jonathan, and Abinadab, and Malchishua, the sons of Saul.

And the battle against Saul became fierce, and the arrows struck him with arrows, and he was greatly wounded by the arrows.

And Saul said to his armourbearer, Draw your sword and kill me with it, lest these uncircumcised men come and kill me and mock me.

But the squire did not want to, because he was very afraid.

Then Saul took his sword and fell on him.

His armor bearer, seeing that Saul was dead, fell on his sword and died with him.

So Saul died that day, and his three sons, and his armourbearer, and all his men together

Elsewhere it is said that Saul was killed by an Amalekite: 2 Samuel 1:6-10

And the boy who told him said, I came by chance to Mount Gilboa, and behold, Saul fell on his spear, and the chariots and horsemen overtook him.

Then he looked back and, seeing me, called me.

And I said: here I am.

He said to me: who are you?

And I said to him: I am an Amalekite.

Then he said to me: come to me and kill me, for mortal anguish has seized me, my soul is still within me.

And I went up to him and killed him, for I knew that he would not live after his fall

Controversy

Explanation
: Saul tried to commit suicide by falling on his sword.
When he did this, so did his squire. But Saul survived and, after some time, waking up, he realized that he would not be able to finish himself off. Therefore, he called out to an Amalekite who happened to come to the mountain and asked him to finish him off: “ Come to me and kill me, for mortal anguish has seized me, my soul is still within me.
And I went up to him and killed him, for I knew that he would not live after his fall ."
The Amalekite did what Saul asked him to do. This question is not a contradiction. It’s just that 2 Samuel
gives a more detailed story of the death of King Saul.

APPEARING CONTRADITION No. 76

In one place it is said that Saul fell on his sword: 1 Samuel 31:4-6

And Saul said to his armourbearer, Draw your sword and kill me with it, lest these uncircumcised men come and kill me and mock me. .

But the squire did not want to, because he was very afraid.

Then Saul took his sword and fell on him.

His armor bearer, seeing that Saul was dead, fell on his sword and died with him.

So Saul died that day, and his three sons, and his armourbearer, and all his men together

Elsewhere it is said that Saul fell on his spear: 2 Samuel 1:6-10

And the boy who told him said, “I came by chance to Mount Gilboa, and, behold, Saul fell on his spear, and the chariots and horsemen overtook his.

Then he looked back and, seeing me, called me.

And I said: here I am.

He said to me: who are you?

And I said to him: I am an Amalekite.

Then he said to me: come to me and kill me, for mortal anguish has seized me, my soul is still within me.

And I went up to him and killed him, for I knew that he would not live after his fall

Contradiction

Explanation
: Saul fell on his sword.
The expression in 2 Samuel
“
Saul fell on his spear
” is translated incorrectly in the Russian Bible.
If you compare both passages in the original, it is easy to see the difference between the words used in them.
The Hebrew word used
in 1 Samuel is naphal
, meaning to fall.
And in 2 Kings
the word “
sha`an
” (shaw-an') is used - to support, to lean on.
Therefore, the translation of the second passage should be as follows: 2 Samuel 1:6-10
“
And the boy who told him said, “I came by chance to Mount Gilboa, and behold, Saul leaned on his spear, and the chariots and horsemen overtook him.”
Then he looked back and, seeing me, called me. And I said: here I am. He said to me: who are you? And I said to him: I am an Amalekite. Then he said to me: come to me and kill me, for mortal anguish has seized me, my soul is still within me. And I went up to him and killed him, for I knew that he would not live after his fall ."
Based on this, the meaning of the second passage is as follows. An Amalekite who happened to come to Mount Gilboa saw the wounded Saul leaning on his spear. Having assessed the situation, the Amalekite realized that Saul was trying to commit suicide so as not to be captured by his enemies. Seeing that Saul’s wound after falling on the sword was mortal, the Amalekite, at Saul’s request, finished him off so that he would not suffer: “ And I approached him and killed him, for I knew that he would not be alive after his fall
[on the sword] "(verse 10).

Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion One
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Two
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Three
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Four
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Five
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Six
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Seven
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Eight
Contradictions in the Bible: Discussion Nine

Ask your question

Back to the beginning of the article

What is known about Simon?

Photo: Hram-troicy.prihod.ru
In the New Testament, Simon is called a Cyreneite, which means that he either came to Jerusalem as a pilgrim for the Passover holiday from Cyrene, or, more likely, belonged to a family of Jews who lived in dispersion in Africa, and, Having returned to his homeland (Israel), he took up farming (as he was leaving the field).

Bishop Michael (Luzin) believes that the evangelist’s mention of Rufus and Alexander, the sons of Simon (Mark 15:21), indicates that they were familiar with the apostles and were probably disciples of Jesus. We find confirmation of this fact in the letter of the Apostle Paul (Rom. 16:13), where Rufus and Alexander are mentioned as Roman Christians. Professor A.P. Lopukhin shares the same opinion. Subsequently, Alexander became a martyr in Carthage (took priesthood and martyrdom for Christ).

Twelfth Station of the Cross

Jesus dies on the cross

At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice: Eloi! Eloi! Lama sabachthani? What does it mean: My God!, My God! Why did you leave me? And one ran, filled a sponge with vinegar, and, putting it on a reed, gave Him to drink. Jesus cried out loudly and gave up the ghost. (Mk 15, 34. 36–37)

Jesus, the Word incarnate, Traveled the greatest distance Fallen humanity can travel. My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? The distance is infinite, the wound is finite, the miracle of love.

Between God and God, Between the Father and the incarnate Son, our despair meets, And Jesus wants to be in solidarity with it to the end.

The absence of God is hell. “I thirst,” Jesus also says, echoing the psalm. My strength has dried up like a shard; My tongue stuck to my throat, and You brought me down from the dust of death.”

God thirsts for man, and man runs away from Him, Building a wall of separation. Nailed to this wall, Jesus says: “I thirst,” and they give Him vinegar. The eternal embrace of the Father and the Son becomes the distance between heaven and hell. “Eloi! Eloi! Lama sabachthani? As if for a moment the crucified God loses faith in God.

And then everything turns around, In Jesus the human will, As in the Garden of Gethsemane, agrees. “Father, into Your hands I commend My Spirit.” The abyss of despair dissipates Like an insignificant drop of hatred, In the bottomless abyss of love. The distance between the Father and the Son is no longer the place of hell, but the abode of the Spirit.

Jesus, You, who have humbled yourself, taking the form of a servant, even to death, and death on the cross, Teach us to say on the day of disaster, Perhaps on the day of death: “Father, into Your hands I commend My Spirit.”

Symbolic meaning or why did Simon carry the cross?

Priest Andrei Chizhenko says in his sermon: “Simon literally fulfilled the words of Christ: “... if anyone wants to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me” (Matthew 16:24). Father Alexander Men explains what this means: “share with Me My suffering... and the desire to die for the world” in order to revive it. “God calls us to drink the bitter medicine of Calvary in order to be healed in the Resurrection of Christ” (Priest Andrei Chizhenko). “It’s not for nothing that we wear a cross on our chest,” writes Priest Philip Parfenov, “it means service to the world, people and the Lord.”

Rev. Jerome the Blessed of Spiridon writes that Simon’s bearing of the cross behind Jesus Christ symbolically means that the pagan peoples accept the Lord’s atoning sacrifice and His Cross, since the stranger obediently bore the Savior’s cross.

( 28 ratings, average: 4.43 out of 5)

Tenth Station of the Cross

Jesus' clothes are torn off

His skin was white, and his hands and face were brown, almost black compared to the white skin of his body.

They began to mercilessly tear off His clothes, thus revealing a thousand wounds one after another. Yet He stood, majestic and calm, as His sacred blood reddened like rubies on the whiteness of His skin.

Then, loudly rattling iron, people brought a basket with nails and hammers. They were not going to cover him with anything other than a shroud of excruciating pain... And so they did.

The evil words of those whom He mourned wounded Him like a thousand fiery arrows.

How else could He have died if His clothes had not been torn off? But He clothed our flesh with His Spirit Not Made by Hands out of love for us! How else could He die? After all, His body itself was the greatest gift of love!