I'm the one who suggested that Jesus may have been taking a Nazirite vow in Matt 26:29, and that is why He refused the "sour wine" which was offered to Him. I still have no idea why my suggestion was met with such hostility. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that a Jew would take a Nazirite vow to consecrate Himself to God. Jesus was baptized,even though He was sinless, so why not take a Nazirite vow before He was crucified? It does NOT make sense to me that Jesus refused the drink offered to Him because it was supposedly a "painkiller." Crucifixion was meant to be horribly painful. That was its purpose. I rather doubt that what the Romans were offering Christ, after His scourging, and after nailing Him to a cross, was a "painkiller."
They may have offered Him a poison to hasten death, but not an analgesic to make it less painful.
And by the way, notice that He was not defiled by coming near a dead body. He died first, and after His death the Romans broke the legs of the criminals who were crucified next to Him.
Also notice that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus were unclean to keep the Passover because they buried Jesus, and defiled themselves by touching a dead body, but there is a loophole for that in Numbers 9:9-11. They just had to postpone it for a month. (cf Lev 23:5) As Pharisees, they surely knew that.
Scott, you posed the question whether one single orthodox theologian had ever taught such a thing. You received a resounding "NO!" from all on the boards. Let me quote from Martin Luther..."Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason---I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other---my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe."
This is from Sproul's [i:5e6c4da8e7]The Holiness of God.[/i:5e6c4da8e7] Sproul goes on to say, "The question is raised how one man dare stand against pope and emperor, councils and creeds, against the entire organized authority of Christendom. What arrogance there must be to contradict the finest scholars and the highest officials of the church, to set his own powers of mind and biblical interpretation against that of the whole world."
Why did Luther do that? Because he was sure he was right? Luther was speaking of salvation by grace. I'm only pointing out something the Jewish Messiah did, in keeping with His Jewishness.
Let it go. I thought the thought was dead long ago.
