Scholars: Crucifixion Portrayal Inaccurate

AP News ^ | Feb 19th,2004 | PETER ENAV

[missyme]

"Critics Never Stop"

JERUSALEM (AP) - The dearth of information about Jesus' crucifixion makes it impossible to describe the event in accurate detail, as Mel Gibson attempts to do in his new film, "The Passion of Christ," Bible scholars and anthropologists say.

The crucifixion is the centerpiece of the movie, set to open in U.S. theaters Feb. 25, Ash Wednesday on the Roman Catholic calendar.

People who have seen the movie say it adopts standard Christian imagery in excruciating detail: Jesus being pinioned to a Latin cross - a T-shaped device with a short upper extension - with one nail driven through both feet and one through each palm.

In a December e-mail sent to The Associated Press, Gibson said he did "an immense amount of reading" to supplement the Bible's relatively unadorned account of the crucifixion in the four Gospels.

"I consulted a huge number of theologians, scholars, priests, spiritual writers," Gibson wrote. "The film is faithful to the Gospels but I had to fill in a lot of details - like the way Jesus would have carried His cross, or whether the nails went through the palms of His hands or his wrists ... Since the experts canceled each other out, I was thrown back on my own resources to weigh the different arguments and decide for myself."

Some scholars say even the most widely recognized features of the crucifixion, such as the shape of the cross and the use of nails, are open to debate.

James F. Strange, professor of religious studies at the University of South Florida in Tampa, said 1st century historian Josephus provided only general information, probably because crucifixion was so common that details seemed superfluous.

Crucifixion was first used in the 5th century B.C., and was a widely used form of execution in Asia, Europe and Africa for the ensuing eight centuries, said Israeli anthropologist Joe Zias. Depending on technique, death could be swift or take days.

"If you suspended people by their hands and left their feet free you would kill them within an hour," Zias said. "If you suspended them in a way they couldn't exhale they'd be dead within minutes."

Zias said the question of whether Jesus was nailed to the cross or simply tied to it remains a mystery. "There is no evidence whatsoever he was nailed," he said. "The Gospels say he was crucified and leave it at that."

Zias criticized "The Passion of Christ" for accepting the standard version of three nails being used. He said experiments on cadavers carried out by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages have shown that people hanging with nails through their hands will fall to the ground within a relatively short time, pulled by gravity.

The Gospels suggest it took Jesus three to six hours to die.

"All this is Crucifixion 101," Zias said. "People who study these things understand them. But Gibson ignored them in his film."

John Dominic Crossan, emeritus professor of religious studies at DePaul University in Chicago, agrees with Zias that little is known about Jesus' execution.

"Early Christians believed that Jesus was nailed to the cross," he said. "But there is absolutely no proof of this. The only skeleton of a crucified person ever recovered indicated that the two arms were tied to a crossbar, and two nails were used in either shinbone. There was no standard procedure in any of this. The only common feature in the different types of crucifixion is intense sadism."

The type of cross in Jesus' execution is also in question, Crossan said. First century Romans are known to have used both a T-shaped device, without an upper extension, and the Latin cross that is standard in Christian iconography.

Each of the four Gospels says an inscription mocking Jesus as the "king of the Jews" was affixed to the cross. Crossan said this would have made sense "because the whole point of crucifixion was to warn people through alluding to a specific crime."

Two of the Gospels say the inscription was mounted above Jesus. This presumably would strengthen the argument for a Latin cross, which would have provided space for writing about the condemned man's head.

However, the other two Gospels don't give a locator. "It (the written warning) could just as easily have hung around his neck," Crossan said.

Crossan is also uncertain whether the cross on which Jesus was crucified was carried to the execution grounds - either by Simon of Cyrene, as three of the Gospels report, or by Jesus himself, according to John's account.

It is possible that the vertical part of the cross was kept at Golgotha, the place of Jesus' death, and that the condemned person carried the crossbar, Crossan said.

"The point is we simply don't know," he said, "not in general cases and not in the case of Jesus either."

[Godzilla]

As the scholar says, the weight of a human body pulling on nails in hands, or in wrists, would, within a very short time, tear through the tendons and muscles, and the body would fall.

Only if you consider the inaccurate depiction of the nails going thru the hand. The greek word for 'hand' includes the wrist where the bones would be able to hold without tearing.

[kemathen7]

In a Bible Study I participated in a number of years ago, I was told that scholars thought he was nailed AND tied since the nails alone wouldn't be adequate.

Regardless - it was painful, awful, and I'm forever grateful what Jesus endured for all of us.

[sharktrager]

From post 11:

The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord." So he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe." And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, "Peace to you!" Then He said to Thomas, "Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing." And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"

John 20:25-27

[GOP_Proud]

What I noticed is that no one quoted here disputes the crucifiction. Does the "how" really matter? All the descriptions seem excruciating to me.

[sinkspur]

There is documented archaeological proof showing the wear on the bones in the wrist that resulted from the nail. How could one tell from bones if the arms were tied? You can't.

If one was tied at the wrists, after hanging for some period of time, vessels could burst, and bones could even break.

Death would come quickly with nails; the Romans designed their form of crucifixion precisely so that death would NOT come quickly.

[Bohemund]

"The dearth of information about Jesus' crucifixion makes it impossible to describe the event in accurate detail..."

So how do they know that Gibson and 2000 years of tradition are wrong?

Besides, watch the trailer: it looks like Jesus is both tied and nailed onto the cross.

[yarddog]

I had thought the same thing about doubting Thomas.

Back in the 70's our Sunday School teacher was a surgeon. He was also president of the local medical society. He once told the class in detail of the medical results of crucifixion. One thing I remember was that he said the accounts in the gospels were medically accurate.

Something I particularly recall was the part where the soldier stabs him with a spear to see if he were dead and fluid came out. He told us what that indicated although I don't remember exactly what now.

[Bombard]

These so called experts don't anymore about this subject than you or I. Much of what went on during the time of the Roman Empire is unknown. Jesus was crucified that is a fact. It could be that he was crucified like these experts are stateing. Then again the Bible is based on what was common for the things that were done in the first century AD when all four books were written. Also not many of the men exicuted in this manor were given proper burials and thus not many remains are available to confirm how the method was done. So take what these experts say with a grain of salt.

[Ann Archy]

Thes ignoramusses are SMARTER than the Bible....at least theyn THINK so. Idiots....no proof Jesus was nailed, huh.....truly an IDIOTIC ANTI-CHRISTIAN statement.

[Walkin Man]

The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord." So he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe."

Gee, I'm so surprised that the "experts" missed this verse. /sarcasm

[missyme]

Just more slander so they can try to convince people that the Gospels are a lie.... it never stops..Gibson knew that too!

[Ann Archy]

Are you Christian or something else?

[wimpycat]

John Dominic Crossan, emeritus professor of religious studies at DePaul University in Chicago...

They forgot to mention, among Crossan's other titles, "Ex-Priest", and "Member of the 'Jesus Seminar'", so you wouldn't find out which side his bread is buttered on.

[Friend of thunder]

The greek word for 'hand' includes the wrist where the bones would be able to hold without tearing.

Interesting, I had heard that there was a question as to whether the hand could support the weight, but had never heard that the Greek word included the wrist. What is the word?

[missyme]

It is just infuriating when these people get top billing on Internet News sites!

[safisoft]

Well the point is that he really did not die anyways

You are correct if you mean He is not still dead - but He did indeed die. Gnosticism did not die in the 2nd Century as it should have for anyone who can read Scripture - are you Gnostic?

For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Messiah died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.

1 Cor 15:3-4

Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Messiah Y'shua my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Messiah and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Messiah, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death...

Phil 3:9-10

[Fedora]

> The dearth of information about Jesus' crucifixion makes it impossible to describe the event in accurate detail, as Mel Gibson attempts to do in his new film, "The Passion of Christ," Bible scholars and anthropologists say.

Well, duh! Yes, when you make a book into a movie you have to add details that aren't in the book so you can see what's going on. The New Testament doesn't tell us exactly how tall Jesus was, either, so I guess these "scholars" should also be complaining because Gibson picked an actor whose height wasn't historically accurate. Maybe they should take Filmmaking 101 before telling Mel Gibson how to make a movie--or perhaps they should take Theology 101 first, as it's evident they haven't even mastered their own discipline yet.

[Smocker]

I suppose asking St. Thomas to put his hands on His wounds wouldn't count as proof?

Unbelievers, deconstructing the truth as usual.

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP

[Clintons a commie]

Thanks. I was just about to point out the resurrection narrative in John's Gospel. These so-called "experts" are a complete joke.