Luke 23:26 –
As they led Jesus away, a man named Simon, who was from Cyrene, happened to be coming in from the countryside. The soldiers seized him and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus.
This caught my eye because I had always though Jesus carried the cross and not someone else. Interestingly all the Gospels talk about this event, with Mathew, Mark and Luke all talking about Simon carrying the cross. Only in John is the cross carried by Jesus. So interesting that John is the only one that really gets preached, even though it’s the minority.
What does this mean? Have I found a fatal flaw in doctrine and an inconsistency in the Bible thus disproving it? No, not at all since these documents were written years after the events and by different people. I don’t know the custom, but I assume the accused had to carry their cross and maybe since Jesus had been beaten so severely he could not do it after a while. Not really sure and it doesn’t really matter in the long run.
The symbolism of Jesus “bearing the cross” is much more powerful than someone carrying it for him. That gives us a standard. So I can understand why this is rarely taught. How about the symbolism of someone else carrying the cross? This is actually more in line with what is going on in life, Simon carried the cross for Jesus as Jesus is now carrying the cross for us! We all have the opportunity for Jesus to bear our sins if we accept it … so we do not need to be burdened by them to our death! How cool is that?