Jesus' Nudity On The Cross

For some reason, it remains controversial in some circles to acknowledge that, according to the vast majority of all historical evidence (at the very least), Jesus was naked during his crucifixion.  I have seen Christians object, even strongly at times, to this.  In some cases, it is a heretical disdain for the human body that seemingly motivates these objections.  In others, it is a simple lack of historical awareness.

Extra-Biblical records, as well as the Biblical account of Jesus' death itself, indicate that the Romans crucified people nude as an added expression of sadism, degradation, and humiliation.  Why would Jesus be an exception?  Forced nudity was a key component of Roman crucifixion.  When a man or woman (there is a persistent myth that the Romans did not crucify women [1]) was crucified, the involuntary exposure of his or her body signified the loss of autonomy and social status.

As aforementioned, the Bible itself describes Jesus' crucifixion in a manner consistent with external historical sources.  For instance, John 19:23-24 describes how Roman soldiers gambled for Jesus' undergarment.  As a few moments of reflection establish, one cannot wear more clothing underneath an undergarment, by definition of what it is.  Since John says that Jesus was crucified before the soldiers gambled for his undergarment, the implication is blatant: the Bible all but explicitly states that Jesus and the thieves beside him were crucified in a state of total nudity.

Some Christians even say that Jesus can't have been crucified naked because the Jews would have objected to public nudity, which is wrong on two accounts: public nudity was practiced in ancient Israel by the Jews (with voluntary public nudity being a completely non-sinful thing [2]) and crucifixion as a whole was thoroughly contrary to Mosaic Law, which the Jews revered.  Jewish culture in general was not supportive of crucifixion because it was a pagan, foreign form of sadistic torture that contradicted the punishments prescribed in Mosaic Law [3]; that crucifixion involved nudity would not have been the primary or exclusive objection.  It is not that public nudity violates Mosaic Law, but the tortures associated with crucifixion do not.  It is not that forced nudity alone, out of everything else in the crucifixion process, was unjust--the entirety of Roman crucifixion was an abomination by the standard of Mosaic Law.  The argument that Jesus was not executed naked because of Jewish culture is entirely fallacious.

Christian art depicting the crucifixion of Jesus is, in many cases, simply inaccurate according to available historical information.  There is nothing to gain from denial of a historical detail reinforced by a plethora of evidence, including the Bible.  That Jesus, like other victims of crucifixion, was naked when he died might offend some people does not make it untrue.

[1].  That women were crucified by the Romans is often denied or minimized, but Josephus specifically documented that a woman named Ide was crucified (Antiquities of the Jews), and there is no historical evidence that this was an anomaly.  There is a plethora of stupid myths about crucifixion that basic historical evidence contradicts.  Another one is that crucifixions in the geographical area where Jesus was executed did not involve nudity.

[2].  https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2016/08/bible-on-nudity-part-1.html

[3].  https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2016/12/we-are-getting-what-our-deeds-deserve.html