Posted on 06/05/2018 12:28:31 PM PDT by Red Badger
I don’t think it’s necessarily that. I’ve read that crucifixion nails were considered lucky and/or curative, so they were sought after. Also, most of the comments are correct. There was a wide variety of crucifixion methods. Sometimes just rope, sometimes nails. The referenced Israeli find pretty much locks down that nails were sometimes used, since the heel bone was found, still nailed to wood.
Sure seems that way and no doubt they would love to.
There's nothing the God haters would like more than to offer up *proof* that Jesus wasn't who He said He was.
Interestingly, Jehovah's Witnesses USED to use the cross in their literature.
Not sure when they changed to not using it at all, and making the claim about the "pole" or "stake" vs. the T-shaped cross.
From a technical issue, I don't know which would be more efficient.
Maybe the Romans used both.
But the Bible clearly mentions a cross.
So there had to be some *evidence* of it being used.
Arms were not always nailed, sometimes they were tied with ropes above the head to make it harder to breathe..................
These remains were found in Venice, Italy, not Jerusalem.....................
A friend of mine did a research paper on crucifixion and college and I read it. One of the things that stood out was the fact that iron being a semi precious metal during those years was all these Salvage from the crucified body and reused for melted down and reformed. They’ve never found a body with a nail in it except once and the reason they think the nail remained in the bone was because it was too hard to pull out as it had curled under and fish hooked into the timber. And at the time that was the only bone ever found with a crucifixion Spike embedded in the bone. I found that fact to be fascinating.
Physically, nailing hands/wrists is a very weak way of securing body up. Death was by suffocation as the body slumped down, so the weight was only the shoulders-arms-hands/wrists to the nails or rope. Or both.
Hence, when the legs were broken, the weight could not be pushed up to breathe, and death came quickly. Which was NOT the goal of “excruciating” punishment for treason, rebellion, or slave revolt that the Romans needed.
Biblically, the two criminals were still alive, so their legs were broken. Jesus was just then dead, so He was left intact - as prophesied.
It looks like the Greek word is “stauros,” which can be translated “cross” or “stake.”
The Vulgate uses “crux” which is definitely “cross.”
My Latin is much better than my Greek.
It seems that having the arms spread out would make the punishment more agonizing.
Multiply your numbers by 10,000 and you still fall short.
.
Since the Romans were all about punishment, as an example to others, it seems like they would have NOT used a more "humane" method, like hanging.
According to the Bible, Jesus was on the cross for a LONG time.
If it was a "quick" death, they would have not opted for it.
Thanks Red Badger. Interesting that the Romans had picked up the practice from the Carthaginians, I'd not known that.
I’ve seen some of that book, or perhaps it was on TV. Pretty amazing what experts in trauma and anatomy can figure out from the image on the Shroud of Turin. I don’t treat it as “Holy” - but I do believe that it is the image of Jesus based on the scientific evidence.
And the Carthaginians got it from the Assyrians...................
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVHUCOgFygc Proof of Jesus right after the flood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
