Tim Maas Supporter Retired Quality Assurance Specialist with the U.S. Army

I would say that Matthew, Mark, and John were describing the same garment from perspectives that could have differed for varying reasons, possibly including reasons that were inspired.

Matthew could have been describing the literal color of the garment that the soldiers placed on Jesus (which, I understand, would have been a standard item of issue to Roman soldiers), while also symbolically representing (by the use of the word "scarlet" to describe its color) the sin of humanity that Jesus was being "cloaked" with in His suffering and death. 

Mark and John could have called the garment purple (in addition to that color possibly being a legitimate rendering of it, depending on factors such as lighting, angle, distance, or individual perception) in reference to the soldiers' mockery of Jesus' as a king (since purple was (and still is) a color traditionally associated with royalty).

Also, perhaps the garment (which no one alive today has seen) could justifiably have been described as either color based on the composition of its material (just as the veil of the tabernacle might have been, based on the varying colors (including both scarlet and purple) that God directed to be used in its fabrication (Exodus 26:31), or as different people even today might legitimately describe the same object as being varying colors, with none of them deliberately misrepresenting their perception.

July 18 2018 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report