[Mr. Lucky]

...and the significance of this criticism is?

[JmyBryan]

"Early Christians believed that Jesus was nailed to the cross," he said. "But there is absolutely no proof of this."

Excepting the small fact that early Christians believed it ... duh!

[sinkspur]

My reading, 30 years ago, also indicated that there was no basis to conclude that Jesus was nailed to a cross.

He was likely tied, with a small platform for his feet. He died of asphyxiation.

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.

Besides, tying the arms to the cross-beam would put all the pressure on the lungs, which is what made crucifixion an excruciating death: gradual suffocation.

[onedoug]

Guess one can't even think about it by such foolish criteria.

[Jagdgewehr]

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

So then how do they make the claim that the portrayal is "inacurrate?"

[smith288]

"Experts say....[blah blah blah]"


Well that does it...im going to turn to Islam now... *rolling eyes*

[KantianBurke]

Maybe these guys know!

[Stone Mountain]

I couldn't find the story from the link. Just wondering if the "Critics Never Stop" line was in the story or something you provided. Thanks...

[Godzilla]

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."

Kinda hard to show Thomas his scars, you think

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."

Crossan is one of the fringe 'theologians' of the Jesus Seminar. 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.

[swampfox98]

"The Gospels say he was crucified and leave it at that."

Then why did the risen Jesus show St. Thomas the nail prints in his hands, and asked him to touch them? Deliver me from scholars! Read your New Testament! If you can read.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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

[stylin19a]

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."

It seems the disputes noted in this article justifies Gibson's handling of this.

[Just mythoughts]

Oh, so the "Scholars" got to get their two cents in.

Very few "Scholars" are believers, most make their living disproving what is WRITTEN.

Christians should be very aware who does their translating and Bible studies for them. Some preachers are so lazy they must rely on the organization to pass down to them a print-out of what to preach.

Scholars have "PEER REVIEW" as well.

[Rome2000]

The dearth of information about Jesus' crucifixion

Excuse me if ABCCBSNBCNYTLATWPCNNNPR were not on the scene to file a report.

The Bible works for me.