Page 84 - bv19

84 The Messiah’s Crucifixion Tree

The Jews therefore, because it was the day of preparation, so that the BODIES [plural]
should not remain on the CROSS [tree -- singular] on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a
high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away
(19:31, NIV).

Carefully note that the word “BODIES” is plural, whereas the word “CROSS” is singular.
Here, the word stauros is translated “cross” and refers to the tree with three attached crossbars.

The New Testament records that the two criminals were crucified to the Messiah’s right and
left -- see Luke 23:33. However, a careful study of the New Testament nowhere indicates that they
were crucified on separate crosses. This can only mean that Yeshua and the two criminals were
CRUCIFIED ON THE SAME TREE! One man was crucified on his right side and the other on his
left side. The symbolic picture represented by this arrangement is truly significant and will be dis-
cussed later.

It is now easy to understand how these men could have conversed with each other despite
their agony and difficulty in speaking! Now we can clearly see that the soldiers came first to one
thief, second to the next thief, and lastly to the Messiah -- as they walked AROUND the tree break-
ing legs as necessary to hasten death!

Bullinger’s Theory

Because Dr. Bullinger in his Companion Bible failed to understand that the Messiah was
crucified on a living tree, he concocted a radical theory to try and explain how the Roman soldiers
killed first the two robbers and last of all came to the Messiah in the middle to slay him. According
to Bullinger there were actually four others besides Yeshua who were crucified that day. He
claimed that the Bible was showing there were two others on each side of the Messiah who were
crucified with him. His reasoning was as follows: Since the New Testament called those crucified
with the Messiah both “robbers” (Matthew 27:38) and also “malefactors” (criminals) (Luke 23:32),
Bullinger came to the erroneous conclusion that there were two “malefactors” and also two “rob-
bers”! This is why Bullinger came to believe that the two malefactors on one side had their legs bro-
ken first and then the soldiers came to the Messiah in the middle of the two malefactors and the two
robbers. While Bullinger’s hypothesis was ingenious, the Bible nowhere supports such an interpre-
tation. In fact, all robbers are criminals (malefactors), but it is NOT true that all criminals are rob-
bers. Luke simply used the generic term “malefactors” (criminals) to refer to the two robbers who
were crucified with the Messiah.

However, Bullinger had a real point. How could the soldiers first break the legs of the two
robbers and then come to Yeshua who was in the middle of them? Actually, the answer is quite sim-
ple! Notice what Ernest Martin wrote –

Since we are told by the apostle John (who was an eyewitness to the crucifixion) that all
three were crucified on ONE stauros (i.e. a single tree), it is easy to see how the Roman sol-
diers broke the legs of the robber in the Messiah’s right side (who had his back to the Mes-
siah and was located on the northeast side of him) and then they broke the legs of the robber
on the Messiah’s left side (who also had his back to the Messiah but was located on the

The Berean Voice March-April 2003