Blood and water poured out of his side when he was stabbed. Only after physical death does this happen, when the blood in pericardium around the heart separate into blood cells and plasma.
And you can't fake being dead for three full days and be capable of walking.
The Roman soldiers were asleep, which was punishable by death. There is no way they were paid off.
But he didn't. These are absolutely pointless what-ifs. The Romans were well versed in death-by-torture, they knew how to make it last.
Sweating blood with fear before it happens doesn't make it sound like he couldn't feel pain.
What does this even mean? To this day the Orthodox Jews and atheist Jews hate Jesus. Many Orthodox Jews have stated that they hate Christ more than they hate Adolf.
And you seem to have missed the part of the Crucifixion where God the Father turns his face away from Christ. The suffering from this would be infinitely worse than any physical pain.
Christ's crucifction
What has this got to do with the OP question? It's a nice verse but I don't see the connection…
Someone once explained to me that based on the premise that Hell is complete separation from God, the fact that God sent his Son to be completely separated from his presence is extremely impactful. Especially when you think of Christ having spent his entire mortal life being one with God; to be separated from that and thrown into sin, how that must have felt is impossible for me to fathom.
While the physical death and torute itself is bad, His separation from His Son, part of Himself, in Hell is the true sacrifice.
He could've just killed himself but he didn't
He had a brutal death enduring many hours of pain
On the contrary, The Apostle says (Ephesians 5:2): "He delivered Himself up for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God for an odor of sweetness."
I answer that, A sacrifice properly so called is something done for that honor which is properly due to God, in order to appease Him: and hence it is that Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x): "A true sacrifice is every good work done in order that we may cling to God in holy fellowship, yet referred to that consummation of happiness wherein we can be truly blessed."
But, as is added in the same place, "Christ offered Himself up for us in the Passion": and this voluntary enduring of the Passion was most acceptable to God, as coming from charity. Therefore it is manifest that Christ's Passion was a true sacrifice.
Moreover, as Augustine says farther on in the same book, "the primitive sacrifices of the holy Fathers were many and various signs of this true sacrifice, one being prefigured by many, in the same way as a single concept of thought is expressed in many words, in order to commend it without tediousness": and, as Augustine observes, (De Trin. iv), "since there are four things to be noted in every sacrifice—to wit, to whom it is offered, by whom it is offered, what is offered, and for whom it is offered—that the same one true Mediator reconciling us with God through the peace-sacrifice might continue to be one with Him to whom He offered it, might be one with them for whom He offered it, and might Himself be the offerer and what He offered."
I couldn't understand this for a long time, still don't really, but the symbolic world is not like the world of secular reason. You can say that it wasn't a sacrifice because sacrifices require the permanent death and destruction of the thing sacrificed. You can also say that God is irrational and stupid for sacrificing himself to himself (this is the stronger argument btw).
But both of those criticisms miss the importance that life is suffering and death, but that the resurrection is there to say that it is not meaningless suffering despite all the reasons you might think it meaningless. I suppose that's why, having been an atheist, I used to find the fixation of religious people with art depicting the suffering on the cross very weird, but now I find it moving (although I still wouldn't keep such an icon in my house, that shit still gets a tad creepy if looking at it doesn't come with a sense of its importance).
How it is not? It is clear to me that you are terrified of death.
Did you read that before writing it? Or did you try to come up with retarded theories, no matter how much stupid and nonsensical they are? Because it is the most pathetic, cringe inducing set of mental gymnastics I have seen from somone in complete denial.
He didn't go to Hell, he went to Hades. In any case, Christ is a member of the Godhead, so he can't be "completely separate" from the Father in any real sense.
He was sacrificed to himself so it's his call.