Play the right way. It’s a term we hear a lot in hockey but it can mean different things for each team.
What does it mean for the Golden Knights? Jonathan Marchessault broke it down in explaining what went wrong against the Edmonton Oilers on Tuesday night.
You’ve got to wear their top guys down. You have to make sure they play defense. You can’t turn pucks over in the neutral zone. You have to make sure you stay out of the box. You have to check with your legs and put yourself in good positions. When you don’t have the puck you have to fight to be above it. -Marchessault
Most of what he said has essentially been turned into hockey cliches that lack true meaning. For the Golden Knights though, it really can be this simple, despite it being challenging to do especially against good teams.
The order in which Marchessault described the keys to “playing the right way” is not quite right though as many aspects lead to the next.
For me, the biggest key to every game for Vegas is puck management. Marchessault specifically pointed out the neutral zone against Edmonton, and he’s spot on there, but it can change depending on the opponent. When the Golden Knights play heavy forechecking teams, they have to be extra careful with their puck management in the defensive zone. When they play transition-reliant teams like Carolina, Florida, or Calgary, VGK must be aware to take care of the puck near the offensive blue line. Without puck management, nothing else matters for this team.
Next is “checking with your legs” and “fighting to be above the puck.” In many ways, this goes hand in hand with puck management as it’s much easier to be in proper positions when possession is lost safely as opposed to poor turnovers. Mistakes are going to happen though, and working to put out those fires is not always easy, but it’s imperative for the Golden Knights to succeed. They can’t reach and they can’t pass responsibility off to the defensemen to make up for the errors. When the Golden Knights have four or five players between the puck and the goal, they are incredibly tough to score on. When they don’t, it leads to the next issue. Penalties.
The Golden Knights are a very disciplined team. They rarely take after-whistle penalties, they hardly ever take penalties in the offensive zone, and you don’t see them retaliate often. The penalties they do take are typically related to breakdowns mentioned in the previous two paragraphs. If VGK take care of the puck and work to get back into position defensively, it’s much easier to stay out of the box.
Finally, the last two pieces of the game mentioned by Marchessault, “make them play defense” and “wear the top guys down.” If everything else above is taken care of, this is Vegas’ bread and butter. The way the Golden Knights attack, making life difficult on the opposing teams’ best players will happen on its own. Vegas is good at holding the puck in the offensive zone, they are strong along the walls, and their forecheck is tricky to consistently beat when it’s working together as a five-man unit. It’s worked against Connor McDavid, it’s worked against Nathan MacKinnon, and it’ll work against whoever else the Golden Knights face in the playoffs too.
As a team we don’t have anything flashy. If we play the right way that’s how we’re going to win games in the long run. We’re a veteran group and a mature group and I think we’re built to win games in the playoffs. I’m confident in that. -Marchessault
When they do it, it looks like the 3rd period in Edmonton. When they don’t, it looks like the three in Vegas.
Nice they are aware what’s necessary the challenge of course is transferring that across the board for each and every players involved which often is a problem. That and attitude is the difference when TEAM ‘A’ shows up at the rink. I noticed there was no mention of the necessity to have a PP that can put the puck in the net or the PK and goalie keeping the puck out.PK somewhat addressed by staying out of the penalty box. Time for a big win tonight and display all the things they are aware of and necessary to win.
The only move that didnt jive with the “built for the playoffs” plan was getting Kessel. Teams will exploit that matchup on the road.
Phil Kessel has won two Stanley cups, and should have won the Conn Smythe trophy in one of them. He’s also playing his best hockey of the year.
Agree with you! Kessel’s speed is still impressive and he is playing with a lot of confidence now. He will be a contributor in the playoffs.
I just don’t understand what they see in Kolesar. He really isn’t that tough (have never seen him actually win a fight) and when he is dressed and Paul Cotter isn’t it’s hard to understand. Cotter has almost twice as many goals (13) compared to Koelsar’s 7 and Cotter is as tough if not tougher in the corners.
THE hockey GOD
past performance is not a guarantee of present, or future, results.
Fair Use Disclaimer: Discloses that legally copyrighted materials on website with the appropriate permissions.
Warranty Disclaimer: Explains that sellers and service providers are not responsible for possible product or service failures.
Copyright Disclaimer: site visitors know that site contains copyrighted material.
No Responsibility Disclaimer: Informs users that posters are not responsible for the actions they take based on content found on website.
Confidentiality Disclaimer: Assures users that some content, such as contact information, is only intended to be seen by certain parties.
Affiliate Disclaimer: Discloses participation in an affiliate program, such as posted advertisers.
YouTube Disclaimer: Any disclaimer found in the description of a YouTube video. Commonly, copyright disclaimers and no responsibility disclaimers double as YouTube disclaimers and website disclaimer.
Views Expressed Disclaimer: Specify that the opinions found on website are not the views or opinions of business or other posters opinions.
Investment Disclaimer: Informs readers that investment commentary is informational and should not be taken as official advice.
No Guarantee Disclaimer: Announces that website or site makes no promises about the results of a product or service.
Use at Your Own Risk Disclaimer: Instructs site’s visitors to act on your content or recommendations at their own risk.
Email Disclaimer: Any disclaimer added to the footer of an email. Most often, confidentiality disclaimers act as email disclaimers.
Past Performance Disclaimer: States that previous results do not equal future results.
Medical Disclaimer: Informs users that the content on the site is provided for informational purposes only and does not substitute professional medical advice or seeing a doctor. Although some posters here clearly should seek therapy.
ThG , any , all names under ThG, characters posted as ThG, and incidents portrayed in this website are fictitious. No identification with actual persons (living or deceased), places, buildings, and products is intended or should be inferred by these posts.
That should cover it.
THE hockey GOD
If I have sex with a woman who used to be a man, is that okay? I love people who have sex changes.
Yea we should dominate tonight, but Theo out, others still out, we need our regulars back and healthy to make a run! If we get Theo, William, Smith, LT, dare I sat Stone back, we will be very dangerous! If not?
THE hockey GOD
JB if they are 100% , yes, I agree.
Resurrection Sunday needed for no. 27, no. 19, LT, no 28, and Captain.
Interesting no. 71 has been wearing the A. And his game has picked up.
One major issue I have with this analysis is the statement that the VGK are very good at keeping the puck in the offensive zone. They are, at times, but way too inconsistent! This is an area that we’ve some improvement on with the addition of Barbashev and Bleuger. Carrier and Cotter are two others who are tough enough to battle, win and maintain puck possession in the offensive zone.
Tonight is a game that the VGK cannot take lightly. The injuries right now are very concerning with Theodore and Smith out. The goaltending has been good enough, but the VGK really needs to get LT and Hill healthy.
Lots of talk about playoffs, and that is totally inappropriate! Right now, the VGK has not yet earned a playoff spot. Period. They’d better not be looking past this game tonight. They could find themselves in 3rd place pretty quick unless they truly look at each and every game as a playoff game. If they had a 10 point lead right now, sure no problem. But you have 2 teams right on your heels. The VGK cannot afford to let up the gas and have another shitty performance like the one against EDM.
I am not sure which goaltender is healthy right now. Pick the one that is in the best shape for sure. Don’t save Thompson or Hill. If they are ready to go they should be in the paint tonight!
Make the playoffs tonight and then worry about the Pacific Division title tomorrow.
THE hockey GOD
after loss against oilers in last game, this article is getting a head of itself; the only good thing happening today is two teams behind VGK are playing each other tonight. VGK have yet to clinch a playoff spot. Two key players are out now, not mentioning their captain. IF they don’t bounce back tonight and win, then katie bar the door !
THE hockey GOD
When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also was a disciple of Jesus. He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him. And Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut in the rock. And he rolled a great stone to the entrance of the tomb and went away. – Matthew 27:57-60 (ESV)
Common to all definitions of “pattern” is the idea of repetition. A seamstress pins a paper pattern on cloth so she can repeat that pattern on the material she will make into a dress. A foundry worker packs a wooden pattern of a gear into special sand so the cavity left by the pattern can be filled with molten metal, thus repeating the pattern.
A pattern like the one pictured below uses repeated colored dots to form something larger which can be recognized, a “W” in this case. With patterns of this kind, the more dots there are, the clearer the “W” will be for those who can distinguish colors. The existence of the “W” becomes undeniable.
As archaeological discoveries which affirm biblical accounts happen repeatedly, along with textual and even astronomy-related discoveries, these form something larger, just as the repeated dots become the “W”. The pattern formed by the repetition of text-affirming discoveries tells a larger truth, that the Bible is true by its nature.
In this Thinker Update we take up what has been called the single-most-studied object in the world, The Shroud of Turin. Millions continue to believe it is the burial shroud of Jesus Christ.
The matter of patterns is most relevant to a discussion of the Shroud. Patterns of evidence discovered and undeniably present within the Shroud weigh heavily in favor of the claim that it is Jesus’ burial cloth.
Absolute proof that the Shroud is genuine will never be established, because no chain of custody exists for the Shroud before the Middle Ages. But we live our lives without absolute proof of many things. We rely on the preponderance of evidence, and we make our decisions.
Researchers have discovered many individual patterns of evidence within the Shroud itself, and these form a larger pattern when taken together. Space considerations allow us to speak to some, though not all of them, here.
He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God. – Acts 1:3 (ESV)
The Shroud of Turin, kept in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy. The Shroud presents an image of a crucified man in great detail. Millions believe that this is the cloth which wrapped Jesus Christ in his tomb, and that the image is his. (public domain)
The Patterns in Cloth
The Shroud of Turin is made of fine linen, woven in a three-to-one herringbone pattern. The direction of the twist of the strands rules out Egypt as the country of origin and affirms Palestine. The Shroud’s length and width are in even cubits, a unit of measurement not used in medieval Europe where critics say the Shroud was faked, but in ancient Israel. The unusual weave reflects a wealthy owner, and Joseph of Arimathea was certainly that. (Matthew 27:57)
In 2002, conservation measures were taken secretly for the Shroud in Italy. With the 16th Century backing cloth removed from the Shroud for the first time, textile expert Mechthilde Flury-Lemberg discovered a rare type stitch on the back side of the Shroud which was known from only one other place, the Masada Fortress in Israel, which fell to the Romans in the Jewish revolt less than a generation from Jesus’ time
The Pattern in the Image
The image on the Shroud of a man crucified is its greatest mystery. To this day, after exhaustive scientific study and numerous attempts to duplicate the figure of the man shown on it, no one has been able to do this at the microscopic level of the linen fibers. The image is on the outermost layers of those fibers as discolorations. They are microscopic pixels. The image is not painted, despite the continued claims of people who simply repeat this explanation over and against the verdict of the experts from the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), and others before and since.
The only traces of paint are from duplicates of the Shroud that were pressed against the Shroud to sanctify the duplicates in earlier centuries. These are tiny flakes of paint. The linen fibers themselves show no trace of brush strokes, binder or pigment. Nothing has soaked in; nothing is present to soak in.
Only in very recent times have scientists found a way to discolor linen strands as they are found in the Shroud of Turin, discolorations penetrating only to a tiny fraction of the width of a human hair. It was done with microbursts from high energy lasers. A burst of high energy! This carries suggestions of its own about the man of the Shroud, because if it is Jesus, he is proclaimed to be raised from the dead. Is the Shroud a “snapshot of the resurrection?”
nyone who has seen the actual Shroud, or a full-size, high detail reproduction of it, knows that the image of the crucified man is a negative, rather than a positive, image. How or why an alleged forger did that has no answers. But to recognize the image, one must be six or eight feet back from the Shroud. Any closer and the image on the cloth is lost. This fact further argues against a forger. How could such an image be created by someone working up close?
The Pattern of the Body and the Wounds
The proportions of the body are perfect according to artists like Dame Isabel Piczek. Wounds appear on the image which science has established to have been present on the cloth prior to the presence of the body image itself. If you will imagine hand-writing a message on a sheet of paper, but dotting the “i’s”, crossing the “t’s”, and inserting all the commas and periods before you wrote any words on the paper, you have an analogy to what an alleged forger must have done, putting blood on all the wounds before the wounds were located on the cloth. And the blood has been shown to be actual human blood, type AB.
Normally, blood becomes brown as it ages. The blood of the Shroud is red, which seems impossible if it is two thousand years old. This has been advanced as evidence of fakery. But blood chemists know of changes in the blood of persons under great stress or suffering, like a crucifixion victim. Bilirubin is a pigment that enters the blood with the breakdown of red cells. It causes blood to hold a red color. Did a forger use actual human blood, and torture his donor so the blood would remain red for centuries, then paint the blood on the linen cloth before there was an image, all in order to fool people centuries later?
And their is a coroner stamp in faint letters found on the shroud which states Joshua on one side, and Nazerine on folded side.
In addition, soil was found around nose (where Jesus fell carrying the cross) and feet that when examined in detailed was found to match the limestone composition around Jerusalem. This strongly counters the premise that this was a middle age concoction.
Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed. – Isaiah 53:4-5 (NIV)
Well they carbon data d it in 1970s, yes but the patched portion from fire in middle ages, recent non destruction techniques date it much further back in time. Also, the face cloth, called the sudarium of ovieda, a completely separate cloth piece contains the same image and blood content , and face pattern on the Shroud.
Patterns of Evidence for Jesus’ Shroud of Turin
Dr. Fred Baltz |
April 15, 2022 | Evidence
Repent sinners, judgement day is upon us; especially those sick perverted evil posters here who clearly are not on side of GOD.
THE hockey GOD
The Messiah Will Be Beaten In His Face And Have His Beard Pulled Out By His Revilers
“I gave My back to those who struck Me, And My cheeks to those who plucked out the beard…” —Isaiah 50:6b
New Testament Fulfillment:
“Then they spat in His face and beat Him; and others struck Him with the palms of their hands. ” —Matthew 26:67
Pulling out the beard of a condemned man before crucifixion was a part of the humiliation that was carried out against those who were crucified. The historical records of the Jews, consistently describes men who were condemned to death as having their beards torn from their faces.
Isaiah is clear that Messiah will experience the ripping of His beard during the time of His crucifixion. Matthew describes the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy when they spit in Jesus face, and struck Him with their hands. It was during this time, that those condemned to death by crucifixion received the dishonor of having their beards torn from their faces.
Isaiah 50:6c …I did not hide My face from shame and spitting.
Isaiah 50:6b I gave My back to those who struck Me And My cheeks to those who plucked out the beard…”
In order to understand why Jesus’ beard was ripped from His face, we must go back and read the text from this event. In Matthew chapter 26, Jesus is before the leaders of Israel. These men question Him regarding His true identity and the fact that on many occasions, Jesus had claimed to be the Messiah.
It was because Jesus had stated that He was the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah, that these members of the Sanhedrin were now seeking evidence to condemn Jesus. If He confessed that He was the Messiah, they could use Jesus’ words as evidence to condemn Him to death.
Although no evidence was brought forth at any time that Jesus had committed blasphemy, and He had, in fact, displayed all the evidence necessary to prove that He was both God and Messiah, as the scriptures describe, the Jewish leaders ignored these evidences and proceeded to trap Jesus into saying that He was Messiah.
“Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but found none. Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none. But at last two false witnesses came forward and said, “This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days.’ ” And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!”
“Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy! What do you think?” They answered and said, “He is deserving of death.” Then they spat in His face and beat Him; and others struck Him with the palms of their hands, saying, “Prophesy to us, Christ! Who is the one who struck You?” ~Matthew 26:59-68
Why Didn’t Matthew Say: “Beard Torn From His Face?”
Critics assert that Matthew’s omission of these specific words, proves that this prophecy failed. This conclusion is often made in various places by people who are untrained. It is common for individuals to make false statements about subjects of history for which they have no education to understand.
Scholars who realize what was taking place here, see the omission of the words, “beard torn,” as stunning evidence of authenticity.
First, all men condemned to death by crucifixion by the Jews (hanged on a tree), always had their beards torn from their faces. This was a part of the humiliation that was intended for those who would blaspheme God.
In the above text from Matthew 26:59-68, as the high priest is questioning Jesus and He answers in the affirmative that He is the “Son of Man” (Messiah), at this point Jesus face was spit upon, punched with the palm of the hand, and His beard torn out. The Pharisees did this to Jesus in response to His statement:
“It is as you said. (I Am Messiah) Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
This statement by Jesus, gave the leaders of Israel the right (in their minds), to proceed with the conventional process of spitting, punching, and tearing of the beard that blasphemers always experienced before their execution.
Second, the omission by Matthew of this detail of Jesus beard being torn from His face, was a common artifact of the four Gospels. We often see other places in the four Gospels where critical information is not included, though it is certain that it happened.
It is interesting that there are no New Testament verses which specifically state that they drove nails into Jesus’ hands and feet, but we know that this was always done during crucifixion.
It is by the later testimony of John Chapter 20:25 that we see the disciples knew, that Jesus’ hands and feet had been pierced by nails during His crucifixion.
“Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails…” ~John 20:25
Just as the specific pulling of Jesus beard during His crucifixion is not mentioned, so also was there no mention of nails being driven into His hands and feet. This does not mean these things did not happen, only that they were so common and understood by people who had seen a crucifixion, it was not necessary to mention them in the Gospels.
Differences In Statements Between Matthew And Luke Concerning Jesus As He Is Before The High Priest
Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, “Well, aren’t you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?” But Jesus remained silent. Then the high priest said to him, “I demand in the name of the living God—tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” Jesus replied, “You have said it. And in the future you will see the Son of Man seated in the place of power at God’s right hand and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his clothing to show his horror and said, “Blasphemy! Why do we need other witnesses? You have all heard his blasphemy. What is your verdict?” “Guilty!” they shouted. “He deserves to die!” Then they began to spit in Jesus’ face and beat him with their fists. And some slapped him, jeering, “Prophesy to us, you Messiah! Who hit you that time?” ~Matthew 26:62-68 (NLT)
This verse doesn’t make sense upon first examination. When thee men began to beat Jesus in His face with their fists, and slap Him, they ask Jesus “who hit you that time?”
Understanding that they men who struck Jesus in His face are standing right in front of Him, why would they ask “who hit you?” This makes no sense to the reader until we also read Luke’s account of the same event:
They blindfolded him and said, “Prophesy to us! Who hit you that time?” ~Luke 22:64 (NLT)
Matthew left out the detail that Luke includes, that these men had blindfolded Jesus before they began to hit Him in the face, then asked “who hit you?” The reason these men asked this of Jesus was because He had claimed to be a prophet, who is able to know the future. Without Luke’s detail that Jesus was blindfolded, using Matthew alone, none of what is said about Jesus makes any sense.
Without realizing, Matthew forgot to include the important detail that before these men had beat Jesus in His face, they blindfolded Him. Luke was a Greek Physician who is highly trained in recognizing specific details. Luke includes this fact that Jesus was blindfolded before they struck Him in the face and asked “who hit you?” We see this attribute of inclusive details for Luke in His Gospel and in the Book of Acts. Luke is a precise recorder of details and always tells the reader much more about what is taking place than Matthew, Mark, or John.
This omission was clearly unintentional and not realized by Matthew. It becomes a marker for us as the reader that these narratives are telling us the truth. In false written testimony, we do not see these unintentional errors. We find that liars make certain that their details agree so that they will not be exposed as liars.
This type of testimony where one person includes something that other witnesses leave out, is empirical evidence of genuine testimony. The witnesses didn’t realize they had done this, but we observe it 2,000 years later and it becomes a certainty that these men are telling the truth.
Athanasius (c. 295–373; fl. 325–373) Does Not Record The Beard Being Plucked
One further possibility for this imagined discrepancy is that later translations of the text from Isaiah 50:6, were changed from the original autograph. We see an indication of this when we examine Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in his commentary on Isaiah 50:6, near 350 A.D., where he does not record Isaiah’s text with the words “beard plucked out,” but Athanasius writes Isaiah prophecy as “my cheeks to blows…” with no mention of the beard plucked out.
“He Suffered, Yet He Suffered Not.: And being by nature intangible, the Word yet said, “I gave my back to the stripes, and my cheeks to blows, and I hid not my face from shame and spitting.” ~Athanasius (ACCS 29 Volumes) NPNF 2 4:572**.
Whether this is an indication that the Isaiah 50:6 text in 350 A.D., did not contain the description of Jesus’ beard being torn from His cheeks, or Athanasius merely does not mention it, is unknown. Certainly it is possible that Isaiah never said that Messiah’s beard would be ripped, but because this was a tradition for those who were crucified, later copies which had marginal commentary, added the words, “beard plucked out.”
Confirmation Of Eyewitness Accounts
One of the artifacts that professionals look for in order to detect fraud in examining the written testimony of people who claim to be eyewitnesses, is the differences between individuals who claimed to be at the same scene of an event.
If all of the testimonies are exact, this is an indication of fraud.
If there are slight differences in testimony, this is and indication of truth.
The fact that Matthew omitted the specific text, “beard torn,” from his testimony in the New Testament, is classic proof that the New Testament account of Jesus and His crucifixion are not only true but also accurate.
If someone were intending to falsify the account of Jesus’ life to make it match the clear Old Testament prophecies of Isaiah 50:6, it is for certain that they would include a description of Jesus having His beard pulled out.
Scholars agree that Isaiah’s description is intended for the Messiah. It would have been very easy to add a description for Jesus having His beard torn from His face, if the writers of the gospels were seeking to convince any reader that Jesus was the Messiah. By the absence of this description, it appears as if it was simply an oversight that occurred in the midst of recording the other events described in the New Testament. Such omissions of facts are often the case in actual eyewitness accounts.
John wrote that there were many other things that Jesus did which were not recorded in the New Testament. In fact, John stated that there were so many things Jesus did, that all the libraries of the world could not contain them.
And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen. —John 21:25
If there was a compilation of accounts for what occurred during the death of a person by individual witnesses, it would logically be possible that each person who observed the event would record different facts from their own unique perspective. Some of these descriptions would be identical; others would be similar but have additional details not found in the other accounts. Still others would have important items missing entirely. Finally, it is completely reasonable that some things that would seem to be important to a person doing an investigation of the facts, after the event happened, such as pulling out the beard, would be missing from the record of all eyewitness accounts of every person who watched Jesus’ crucifixion.
Scholars who study ancient manuscripts understand that the truthfulness of documents from antiquity can be validated by these minor differences in how witnesses recall what has taken place. When we are evaluating ancient literature to determine whether written text is truthful or deceptive, there are certain principles that allow us to know if the narrative is true or not.
Linguistic text analysis allows a professional to examine a text to detect certain inconsistencies and anomalies that reveal fraud. The language, syntax, and grammar that are used in describing people and events are key to determining whether a story is true or false.
Those who are experts in linguistic analysis know precisely what to look for in a written statement or story to discover if the verbal behavior is normal or exhibits signs of deceit.
Many people do not realize that it is easier to detect inconsistencies in written statements than it is for those which are made orally.
By studying word choices, it is possible to detect predictable differences between deceptive and truthful statement. These practices are used every day by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in determining whether narratives are true or contrived.
In the presence of multiple writers, their accounts will differ slightly, although telling the same story.
Narratives which are later determined as fraudulent are always found to be identical as multiple witnesses often agree ahead of time to tell the same story. Narratives which are genuine will have different accounts of the same events which validate them as authentic.
In the case of the four Gospels there is no doubt that these men are telling the truth, as their differences of recollection are certain evidence of truthfulness.
These differences in remembered details is a certain evidence of reliable testimony.
The Beard Torn From The Face Was A Part Of Execution For Blasphemy
It is a matter of historical record that those who suffered the scourge and were then crucified often had their beards pulled out by their accusers. It was considered a part of the process that a condemned man’s beard would be pulled out as a sign of the total disdain for the condemned man’s crimes.
Men of this time period considered their beards a mark of honor. There was no greater dishonor or insult to inflict upon a man than to pull out or cut off all or part of his beard.
When the king of Ammon died, David sent his servants to comfort the king’s son Hanun in his grieving. The “princes” of Hanun advised the king’s son that David’s intentions were not honorable, and in fact he was sending spies to search out the city so that David could attack and overthrow Hanun’s kingdom.
Believing the advice of his princes to be correct, this young king took the servants of David and shaved off their beards, cut off their garments to expose their buttocks and sent them back to David. These actions were meant to be the highest insult to David and his kingdom. The fact of their complete humiliation is understood by the final words of 2 Samuel 10:5, where David instructs the men to wait in Jericho until their beards have grown back.
Therefore Hanun took David’s servants, shaved off half of their beards, cut off their garments in the middle, at their buttocks, and sent them away. 5 When they told David, he sent to meet them, because the men were greatly ashamed. And the king said, “Wait at Jericho until your beards have grown, and then return.” —2 Samuel 10:4-5
History Records The Removal Of The Beard As An Act Of Dishonor
It is a record of antiquity that the men of this time period considered these actions to be the highest insult to their honor. To pull out the beard of any man, for any reason, was viewed as degrading and dishonorable. For this reason, it is certain then that during the crucifixion of Jesus, the Roman soldiers, who were known for their brutality, pulled out Jesus’ beard in handfuls rather than take the time to cut it with the sharp edge of a knife. Since it was the goal of His tormentors to inflict as much suffering on Jesus as possible and to insult and degrade Him as a man before the people who were observing the crucifixion, they must have done exactly as this 224th prophecy of Isaiah 50:6 predicts: I gave my cheeks to those who plucked out the beard.
A further area of interest in Isaiah’s prophecy is observed by the presence of death by crucifixion being described six-hundred years before it was invented. The first Crucifixion recorded in the Bible is described King Darius about 520 B.C., as noted in the book of Ezra chapter 6:1-11.
The fact that Crucifixion had not been invented at the writing of these words, gives us even greater pause and reason for astonishment over the words of God, who shows by prophecy that He knows all things. See The Crucifixion of Jesus Christ for details regarding this brutal form of execution.
Further Details Of The Messiah’s Crucifixion
The common picture given for Jesus’ crucifixion is that He was lifted up on the cross, very high above the crowd below. In reality, history records that the crucified were usually just a foot or two above the ground. It should be understood that the entire purpose of crucifixion was to humiliate the condemned by making their execution a visible horror. Those who were placed upon the cross were stripped of all of their clothing, exposing their genitals and allowing the watching crowd to witness the condemned relieving themselves by urination or defecation.
The results of this horrible torture brought insects that further tormented the dying and added to their shame before the watchful eyes of those who often hated and despised the condemned criminal.
A part of the punishment for those who were placed upon the cross was their close proximity to the crowd who were watching them die. The cross itself was only one or two feet above the ground, placing the faces of the condemned near the eye level of their tormentors.
The nearness of the cross to the ground is confirmed in the Jewish writings of Yev. 120b, which describes the official method for determining the actual moment of death for the condemned so that the body could be taken down from the cross. Certain ancient Hebrew writings describe that one of the ways that death was determined to have occurred was by the presence of feral animals in the area who would come and began to feed on the flesh of the feet and legs of the person crucified. These animals were able to gain access to the dead on the cross because of their near proximity to the ground. 
It would be quite normal for any condemned person who was on a cross just two feet from the ground below to have a Roman soldier come near and rip the beard from the face of the dying criminal as an act of contempt.
Isaiah also speaks of the Messiah being struck in the face by His accusers in this prophecy, as well as Isaiah 52:14 (Prophecy 230). Under normal circumstances, when a human being sees a blow coming towards his face, a natural mechanism in the brain will cause the person to recoil his head backwards in anticipation of the strike to his head, which lessens the effects of the blow. If a person has had his vision obstructed, as was the case with Jesus when they blindfolded Him and then struck His face, there would be no opportunity to recoil and lessen the severity of the blow. Jesus experienced the full force of the punches which were targeted at His face and suffered grievous damage to His appearance.
And having blindfolded Him, they struck Him on the face and asked Him, saying, “Prophesy! Who is the one who struck You?” —Luke 22:64
Just as many were astonished at you, So His visage was marred more than any man, And His form more than the sons of men. —Isaiah 52:14
Oh Lord, how much You suffered for us. How great was Your pain. By the exhibition of your suffering for us, You have shown us how great is Your love!
And the shroud shows evidence of beard being torn out.
Isaiah’s Description of Messiah’s Suffering: Beard Ripped Out
By Robert Clifton Robinson
In baseball without pitching your dead in hockey without a goalie your dead. You can candy coated anyway you want but as much as we all want the Knights to win that is one major obstacle. We have a great record and it’s been entertaining overall but I said it before John Gibson not Johnathan Quick and that will come back to bite us in the ass. The other two pickups at the deadline were great moves but they choked on the game altering move.
THE hockey GOD
Tim, in baseball the pitcher is much more powerful than goalie is in hockey. A goalie is only as good as defense in front of it. John Gibson’s asking price was way too high. Quick was gotten for a day ole bag of donuts, and cheap cup of police station coffee. I am not ready to close the book on Quick yet. Hoping for rebound game, or playoff series performance. Hey if choker MAF can do it, like he is now in Minnesota, Quick can do it too.
This weather sucks.
Indicted! Wow, cool !
knights fan in minny
calm down junior he was not convicted this will go nowhere you dems are so gullible
Ken, if you keep indulging this BS, you can kill this whole website. How about enforcing some ‘stick to hockey’ clarity.
agreed – LONG overdue.
Try reading what I wrote son. I said indicted.
A good friend of mine used to say, “This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains.” Think about that for a while – Marchy
Finally, enough with the politics that have NOTHING to do with hockey!
Little bit of Crash Davis.
THE hockey GOD
Go Vegas Knights
Oldie, but a goodie, a quote from one of my favourite people in the world.
Sexuality is who you are personally attracted to… But gender identity is who you are in your soul. … Caitlin Jenner
Playoffs Marchy? How about just beating the 29th ranked team in the NHL in the stretch? Start with that.
-9 shots total through 40 minutes?
-forwards trying to skate through 2 and 3 Sharks, not even a thought of passing the puck
-no offensive presence
-no goaltending (not that Kolesar was all that bad, but he could have been the difference
-Eichel pretty much invisible
-Sharks looking like the team going to the playoffs
-Petro? Sure he made the shitty pass, but that one play was just the diarrhea on top of a total shit show performance for most of the night
-This team played about 7 minutes of total hockey and took 53 minutes off
Totally disgusted. The VGK didn’t deserve that point and if they don’t wake the F up they’ll be slipping down the ladder fast. The schedule is brutal after this. This was a MUST win in my book.
Fuck – I’m done for the night. Almost threw something right threw my screen on that Petro pass, but then I realized that one play was nothing compared to the totally inept lack of passion. Edmonton is on a roll, so is Minnesota.
My prediction of a 3rd place finish or worse just might come through if this team doesn’t wake the hell up.
The difference between Eichel and McDavid?
Night and fucking day. Eichel doesn’t deserve any more than 7 million a year – period.
I meant Brossoit not Kolesar who played a shitt game. That line got bent over in this game.
Agree. Sick and tired of whiners that have nothing to say about hockey. I’m out if this continues.