I don't have to refute the claims @tbswv. All I need do is read them and carefully. ;-) "I counted 370 wounds from the flagellation... We can, therefore, hypothesize a total of at least 600 blows,"

So he counted one number and then "guessed" the second. You, then, repeated the second "guess" as though it were a fact. This isn't the first time I've seen something like this happen when people reference published data. This is why I asked for either your credentials or your source.

What the good doctor is failing to mention is that scientists have already established that each of the two Roman flagra used to scourge Jesus had three strands with two lead beads or each strand. Here's a Shroud-accurate reconstruction from the excellent Shroud Of Turin blog.

So then... each lash would produce six wounds. Using your source's figure of 370, divided by 6, results in 61.67 lashes which rounds up to 62.

This ties in surprisingly close to the Biblical number of "40" when one remembers there were two scourgers. If the Romans counted a full lash as full coverage on both left and right sides of the back that tallies to 31 "full" Roman lashes..

Whatever the exact number of lashes Jesus was scheduled to recieve, the Romans likely stopped before the full sentence was carried out. This explains an odd-ball number like "62" or "31".(as opposed to 70 or 40) The Romans didn't want to kill Jesus at the whipping post. He had to survive long enough to be marched out to Golgotha and then crucified.

As for your original claim "No average man could tolerate 600 blows without dying of shock, or bleeding to death."

So sorry, your source said absolutely nothing how much abuse an average man can or can not take before it kills him and also nothing supporting your claim that Jesus somehow withstood an exceptional amount beyond regular human limits. Again, this is why I insisted on corroborating data.