While the Hebrews used a whip know as a Scorpion, the Romans preferred choice of

whip is known as a Roman Flagellum.  This version of a whip is best described as 

"the Devil's tool."  It was basically half whip and half mace in design.  It varied in

construction by using anywhere from three throngs (straps) of leather, to upwards

of twelve throngs of leather.  At the ends of each throng one would find shards

of glass, broken pottery, bone splinters and/or nails and other metal items

attached.  It was common to incorporate these items within a weighted end by use

 of lead tips or other alloys known to exist in those days.  No two whips were ever

identical because their key components were comprised of recycled materials. 

They also varied in length, being from about 18 inches to 32 inches

and sometimes even longer. 

  In Jesus' case it has been taught that the whip used on Him had nine straps. 

Hence, the term of Cat-Of-Nine tails was picked up.  There's no way to ever

determine exactly how many throngs were actually used on Jesus but one

thing is certain,  He was beaten greater than any other man Isaiah 52:14.

  These Roman whips are devastating to human flesh.  To define flagellum,

it basically translates "to flay" (removal of flesh from the bone; we in present

sense have come to term it as "filet ") which left large gapping and open

wounds of torn, ripped and tattered flesh.  While the Hebrews had set

limits of forty less one (39) stripes only be given, the Romans did not.

  The standard operating procedure for a Roman scourging went something like the

following.  The victim was normally a slave, a criminal or a spy.  By Roman law, no

Roman citizen was ever to be scourged due to its extreme nature of degrading

violence.  However, if you became a spy, a criminal or failed at your official

Roman government appointed duty (jailer, officer, soldier, etc.) then you where no

better than the common slave or criminal and would become subject

to the same "just" punishments.

  To illustrate as to how severe a Roman scourging was go to the book of Acts 16:27. 

Here you will find the distraught jailer whom thought that all the prisoners fled

from the prison after the earthquake.  His reaction says it all, he drew out his own

sword to kill himself.  Why?  He simply failed at his appointed duty and automatically

became a prime target to be used as an extreme example of why one should

never fail at his personal duty as a government employee.  The jailer simply

knew it was better to drive his own sword through his own belly than to

become another poster child and victim of a scourging, Roman style.  One can find

more evidence  of how Romans soldiers were treated for failure of duty in Acts 13:19,

Peter was escorted out of jail by an Angel.

It is also believed that Pontius Pilate had killed himself after falling from

the Emperor Tiberius Caesar's grace only a mere five years after the

crucifixion of Jesus Christ.  That speaks volumes as to why suicide was

apparently preferred over an old fashion Roman scourging.

  Now, take a look at the Apostle Paul himself, what do you think that he was all worked

up about anyway in the sixteenth chapter of the Book of Acts. Paul had already

experienced being beaten, mauled, stoned, and thought to have been dead on one

occasion, shipwrecked, cast into the sea and even bitten by a venomous snake;

all for the love of spreading the Gospel.  When it came time for him to experience

 Roman punishment, Paul was not willing to graduate to this level of persecution. 

 Paul yelled out for Caesar and insisted on making it known that He himself was a

 Roman citizen and wanted no part of being in the Roman judicial system ever again.

  Now back to the illustration of a Roman scourging.  The convicted person would be

stripped of all clothing.  Then an individual with the title of Carnifex

(translates to butcher)would position the victim on his knees

and chain his wrists above his head. Then would anchor him to a scourging post

with his front towards it, or by forcing the victim to lie down face

first on a wooden beam with his arms also chained above

him.  His thighs or ankles would have then been anchored with ropes or chains.  

At this point the beating would begin.  The carnifex would start at the base of the

neck and shoulder area of one side and begin to work his way down swinging the

whip with precision.  Starting at the shoulder, then the ribcage, down to the loin,

buttocks and onto the thigh and calf.  He then would start back at the opposite neck

and shoulder region and work his way down the other side and not stop until the

entire backside was basically destroyed. If and when a victim was unfortunate enough

to have endured a scourging of the entire backside then he would be turned around and

 have his front side scourged too in the same fashion.  During a scourging of the

front side it was not uncommon for the victim to have been disemboweled.

  Most Roman palaces had a Carnifex, whom was any town's most hated person. 

He lived a very lonely life being forced live on the outskirts of town and to 

travel under the secrecy of night due to the fact his job was considered to

being the lowest in position to the rest of the Roman society.  However, at Pilate's

palace this job title was probably assigned to a soldier from the upper ranks

due to the fact the Hebrews lived just outside of his palace and not other

Roman citizens.  I say a soldier of upper ranks because being a Carnifex  was

 actually a skilled-position.  The carnifex was responsible for keeping a person

alive as inhumanly as possible during a scourging.  His job was not to kill the victim. 

That was a lower-skill level job description reserved for the executioner

(after all, anybody could simply kill a chained up person).  Some believe the

world's first surgeons actually stemmed from and found its early beginnings

from the vast amounts of anatomical information provided and gained

 from the sinister skills of the Roman carnifex.

  The New Testament is a bit more vague but is still insightful.  There's a couple of

issues pertaining to the lacking of  any actual eyewitnesses.  The Apostles could

only be writing in third-party sense.  You see, while Jesus was taken inside the

Praetorian for the beatings, His followers, the Apostles and the Jewish High

Council had to remain outside the gates.   The Jewish people could not enter a

gentiles home for it was the Passover Festival season.  Meaning they could

not defile themselves by entering a residence that may be housing any yeast or

leavened bread for it would defile them.  So, while the Jewish people were

standing outside the Praetorian preparing for the Passover meal, the Romans

were inside the Praetorian unknowingly preparing the Passover Lamb,

Jesus Christ.

  Within the Four Gospels, two make reference to the word whip while the

remaining two refer to the word scourge in describing what happened to Jesus. 

 However, both words are interchangeable according to Strong's. 

 They both are defined as a whipping of the most grievous and heinous kind. 

Here's where Satan has pulled the wool over our eyes.

 People of that timeline all knew what a Roman scourging or whipping was.  I liken it

to the use of our of our modern day term drive by shooting.  While all of us

can describe that as a horrible event that would include at least one car

(or more), filled with rival gang members, using multiple firearms

(mostly high-powered semi and automatic weapons), driving by a known target

(or victim), spraying bullets in many directions in an attempt to consciously

take out one or more rivals by death, causing mayhem and usually involving

multiple injuries and death(s) to sometimes many innocent bystanders that

were in the wrong place at the wrong time.  You know an I know this type

of devastating event simply by using three short words; drive by shooting. 

However, what will people think in fifty or one hundred years from now when

they hear or read about the term drive by shooting?  They will probably

assume somebody got shoot by someone else that was driving a vehicle. 

Which is basically true but lacking, unknowingly, the horrific details

involved in this type of event.  In short, they will know the outcome but

have little to no idea of the precursors to and the actions taken within the event.

This is much like the word scourged, Roman style.  We all know Jesus took a

beating or a whipping for us but have now idea of its true, intensively

 brutal definition or the conciseness of the actual event.

Now that we all have a better understanding as to the true definition of

what a Roman scourging was, to put it shortly, an extremely violent and

 torturous beating that inevitably results in death. This type of death and

 dying process would take no more than a couple of days. And as far as

the crucifixion, everybody has been taught and rightly believes the end result

has always been death.  This type of death and dying process could take

up to just over a week. 

  In knowing these facts, several questions comes about why did the Jewish

high council insist on death by crucifixion, which would have been a slower

and longer riddance of the much hated and feared Jesus of Nazareth.  The

scourging would have hastened Jesus death and the high council would have

had a quicker end to the one being call the Son of God.  Somehow, this just

does not make any sense.

  On the other hand, Pilate whom wanted nothing to do with the death of

Jesus decides to have Him scourged.   Now, since Pilate clearly states that he

find this man, Jesus, guilty of no crime, why would Pilate then sentence Jesus

 to the barbaric and relatively quick death sentence of a scourging?

  The answer can be found in Luke 23:7-8, "And as soon as he (Pilate) knew

that He (Jesus) belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who

was also in Jerusalem at that time.  Now when Herod saw Jesus, he was

exceedingly glad; for he had desired for a long time to see Him, because he

had heard many things about Him, and he hoped to see some miracle done by Him."

  This proves and confirms even the secular crowd knew Jesus was known

as a man of miracles and healings.  So, if Jesus could heal multitudes and the

masses, then it would have been apparent that Jesus could heal Himself.

  Now, Pilate was not only a great politician but he was a devoted and wife

fearing man.  Pilate's wife instructed him not to take part in anything with

Jesus; Matt. 27-19, "While he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife

sent to him, saying, "Have nothing to do with that just Man, for I have

suffered many things today in a dream because of Him."

  Hence, Pilate's decision was made easy.  He could please his own wife and

still appease the Jews with the (certain and quick) death sentence of a Roman

scourging.  If Herod Antipas knew Jesus as a healer, certainly Pilate himself

 would have known the same to being true.  So, if Pilate had Jesus beat and

 whipped half to death, Jesus could simply heal Himself and Pilate would

find a quick end to an awful predicament.

  At the same time, the Jewish nonbelievers knew the same was true.  This is

 one of the key reasons they sought out Pilate for the crucifixion of Christ

rather than the scourging of Him.  The Jewish High Council was also aware

of Jesus healing power and feared Roman scourging would only result in Jesus

lingering and totally healing Himself (possibly waiting until the third day),

which would only assist and add support in the fact that

Jesus was truly the very Son of God.

  The Jewish High Council was just as competent in crowd control as Pilate

was a clever politician.  To demonstrate the Councils  devious and diabolical plans,

they needed a public demonstration of Jesus, the mans, suffering and dying. 

And to keep with the scriptures, they also needed at least one bone to be

broken; Psalms 34:20, "He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken."  

 Getting around that issue was much easier than to actually having Jesus

crucified.  According to John 19:31; "Therefore, because it was the Preparation

 Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that

Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be

broken, and that they might be taken away."

  However, something went terrible wrong for both Pilate's decision making

process and the Jewish High Councils demands while Jesus was being

tortured within the scourging chambers of the Praetorian, as always,

God was in control.

  We already know Pilate had Jesus scourged John 19:1 but please keep in

mind the Bible does not state whom actually did the scourging.  It doesnt

state anywhere that a Roman Centurion, Roman Legionnaire, Praetorian Guard

or even the historically accurate individual known as a Carnifex was completing

 the actual scourging of Jesus Christ that night.  As for historical accuracy I

am led to believe it should have been the man with the title of Carnifex.  In spite

 of this, in my own personal heart of hearts, I truly and deeply believe the one

whom swung the scourging whip was none other than Satan himself.  Its quite

obvious Satan was present, after all, who had been manipulating Pilate, the

Jewish High Council and the crowd outside the Praetorian with lies and deceit

 throughout the final hours Jesus was to spend as a man?

  I personally believe this was Satans greatest hours spent here on earth. Here,

Satan had the chance and shear privilege to beat the very deity out of Gods only

 begotten Son and to have final victory over the earth, the heavens and God

himself!  Keep in mind, that Moses wrote the Book of Genesis approximately

1,450 years before Christ was birthed from a womans womb.  Noah, Adam and

Eve precluded that timeline, additionally. Hence, Satan had now already waited 

well over 1,500 years for this very moment in time. Therefore, can one really

imagine that Satan would pass this long awaited opportunity onto a mere

mortal? Remember, even Satan knows the scriptures but please keep in mind that

"New Testament" had not been written yet, so even Satan walk right into

Gods divine plan and lost everything within that dreadful twenty four hour

period of time Jesus endured the many sufferings for all mankind and eternity!

  Now, how bad was Jesus beaten?  Well, Pilate brought Jesus forth twice,

out to the crowd, after enduring the beatings.  First, dressed as a king and

 the second time Jesus had on His own garments John 19:4-14.  If you read

 those scriptures, you will find that Pilate announces to the crowd (twice) that

 it is Jesus they are about to see.  Why would Pilate do that?  After all,

everybody there brought Jesus to Pilate in the first place.  The reason is

simple, Jesus was beaten beyond recognition!

  In fact, Jesus appearance must have been so mangled and mutilated that

Pilate's own thought processes were broken.  In John 19:5, Pilate states,

here's the man and in John 19:14 Pilate states Jesus as the Jews King. 

Whats really odd is that while Jesus was adorned and mocked as a king,

Pilate says, "Behold the Man!" Then when Jesus is brought back out

(again) wearing His own garments, Pilate states, "Behold your King!"

  This not only supports how bad Jesus was beaten but it clearly demonstrates

that Pilate now recognizes Jesus deity!  I believe that Jesus was so mangled

 that Pilate took one look at Him and thought that even the miracle maker

and healer Jesus could not mend Himself.  I also feel at this point Pilate

realized being crucified would hasten the death and shorten the time of

suffering for Jesus.  Pilate realized that he had blown it as a Governor

 and as a husband and needed to wash his hands of this immediately. 

Pilate stated clearly on Jesus cross,

"JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS,"

not guilty of portraying King of the Jews but in fact murdered for His very deity.

  Throughout the four Gospels the colors purple and scarlet are mentioned

for the royal robe that Jesus was forced to adorn.  Two of the Gospels states

"purple," while the other two Gospels states "scarlet."  This has mystified

me for years.  After all, purple and scarlet are two separate and distinctive

colors.  Then I was led to locating and to look upon a "Color Wheel."  What I

found was that while you cant make purple out of scarlet but you can turn

 purple into scarlet.  How?  By simply adding red, "blood red" to be exact.