answersLogoWhite

0

A:This should be considered a symbolic reference to Jesus as the King of the Jews, since purple was associated with royalty. The accusers would not really have had a purple robe to place on Jesus, since only the emperor was allowed to wear a robe that was entirely purple, while senators and the equestrian class jealously guarded their rights to robes with purple borders only.
User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

Still curious? Ask our experts.

Chat with our AI personalities

ViviVivi
Your ride-or-die bestie who's seen you through every high and low.
Chat with Vivi
FranFran
I've made my fair share of mistakes, and if I can help you avoid a few, I'd sure like to try.
Chat with Fran
CoachCoach
Success isn't just about winning—it's about vision, patience, and playing the long game.
Chat with Coach
More answers
A:Mark 15:20 says, "And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to crucify him." This should not be taken too literally, since purple was associated with royalty. Only the emperor was allowed to wear a robe that was entirely purple, while senators and the equestrian class jealously guarded their rights to robes with purple borders only. The accusers would not really have had a purple robe to place on Jesus.
User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
User Avatar

It appears in Mark 15:17 that the soldiers placed a purple robe on Jesus, in order to mock claims that he was king of the Jews, since purple was the colour of royalty.

Purple dye was immensely expensive, so only rich people could afford purple cloth, so it seems strange both that ordinary soldiers would have any purple cloth or that they would risk damaging it by placing it on Jesus before beating him. In the Roman Empire, only the emperor himself was permitted to wear a robe entirely purple ('taking the purple' meant becoming emperor), and even senators were only permitted purple borders on their robes. So, perhaps this passage was only meant symbolically, especially as (Mark 15:20) they put his own clothes back on him - a dignity hard to explain, as they soon removed these garments (Mark 15:24), crucifying him naked.


The author of Matthew's Gospel recognised these problems and changed the colour to scarlet (Matthew 27:28), still an expensive cloth and not so obviously associated with kingship, but not likely to result in charges of treason against the soldiers. The author of Luke's Gospel resolved the issue by redacting it as a 'gorgeous robe' (Luke 23:11), but the author of John's Gospel chose to follow Mark by having Jesus mocked in a purple robe that the soldiers put on him (John 19:2).

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago
User Avatar

He was given a purple robe to wear because He called Himself the King of the Jews. The colour purple is usually associated with royalty.

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
User Avatar

The governor's soldiers. Pontius Pilate was the Roman Governor and the soldiers were Roman soldiers.

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago
User Avatar

black robe

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: When was the purple robe taken from Jesus?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp