Crucified through the hands or wrists?

[Suslar]

Hi everyone,

Yes, yes, I KNOW this questions has been asked before (like every year just before Holy Week, right?) But this time, I can’t find the old threads.

So, please answer ONLY if you can cite references to relevant factual material – I’m not in need of opinions.

The question is - Can you cite proof of Christ being crucified through either His hands or His wrists?

Thanks!

 

[JReducation]

Hi everyone,

Yes, yes, I KNOW this questions has been asked before (like every year just before Holy Week, right?) But this time, I can’t find the old threads.

So, please answer ONLY if you can cite references to relevant factual material – I’m not in need of opinions.

The question is - Can you cite proof of Christ being crucified through either His hands or His wrists?

Thanks!

Using either Google or some other search engine try looking for “Roman executions”. There are several possible ways of crucifying and we don’t know exactly which method was used on Jesus. We have no records. The Greek accounts by the Evangelists don’t help, because in Greek, “the hand” can mean the actual hand or the lower part of the arm, between the radius and ulna, just above the wrist.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[ConstantineTG]

Using either Google or some other search engine try looking for “Roman executions”. There are several possible ways of crucifying and we don’t know exactly which method was used on Jesus. We have no records. The Greek accounts by the Evangelists don’t help, because in Greek, “the hand” can mean the actual hand or the lower part of the arm, between the radius and ulna, just above the wrist.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

But if it were just above the wrist, wouldn’t it be akin to slitting the wrists and Jesus would have bled to death faster than the 3 hours he was on the cross?

I was watching one of those shows on TV, forgot if it was NatGeo or something like that. I know they’re not reliable, but one conclusion is he was nailed in the hands, but also tied by the wrists, which would have supported his weight. Also keeping the arms up higher would mean more suffocation.

 

[spencer2]

Logic would say that he was nailed in the hands and feet but also tied around the chest. The two thieves were also tied around the chest to suffocate them when their legs were ordered to be broken. Just my theory though.

 

[zdon011]

Marks on the Holy Shroud of Turin suggest that the nails passed through the wrists. This is logical: if the palms were nailed, the nails would have torn through and not held up Christ’s weight on the cross

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Crucifixion was used by the Phoenicians, then the Greeks and was “perfected” by the Romans.

Ropes were usually used to hang the victim on the cross, but nails were used, in Roman times, to make an example of those who committed the crime of treason against Caesar.

When our Lord was charged with being the “King of the Jews,” that sealed the manner of His crucifixion and He was even crucified between two “thieves” who were actually insurgents against the Roman empire (“thief” or “bandit” was the common name used by the Romans for insurgents).

According to what contemporaries have written on the subject, there is a point in the wrist that is “hollow” from the top through to the other side and it rests immediately under the main bone that separates the hand proper from the arm. Roman executioners knew of this spot and that is where they drove the nails through to fasten the hands and arms to the cross-beam.

The experienced Roman military executioner would “feel” for the spot as others would hold the arm down onto the cross-beam and when he found it, he placed the nail on top of it and drove it down and through into the wood of the cross-beam, usually with one or two hard strokes of the hammer.

This would also have ensured that our Lord’s bones were not broken as there was a prophecy to this effect.

Long-Suffering Lord Jesus Christ, Crucified for us, have mercy on us sinners!

Alex

 

[angelic06]

Hi everyone,

Yes, yes, I KNOW this questions has been asked before (like every year just before Holy Week, right?) But this time, I can’t find the old threads.

So, please answer ONLY if you can cite references to relevant factual material – I’m not in need of opinions.

The question is - Can you cite proof of Christ being crucified through either His hands or His wrists?

Thanks!

Dr. Pierre Barbet has done some research into this—you may consider reading his Doctor at Calvary (title of book). I do not know what his conclusion was. Remember that this is based on experiments he did, as well as the Shroud of Turin.

 

[Michael_C]

Dr. Pierre Barbet has done some research into this—you may consider reading his Doctor at Calvary (title of book). I do not know what his conclusion was. Remember that this is based on experiments he did, as well as the Shroud of Turin.

I just read this and his conclusion was that our Lord was pierced through the wrists.

I highly recommend this book. Especially for Lent. He has a meditation at the end where he describes as a surgeon what our Lord suffered through the entire passion.

Really good.

 

[JReducation]

But if it were just above the wrist, wouldn’t it be akin to slitting the wrists and Jesus would have bled to death faster than the 3 hours he was on the cross?

I was watching one of those shows on TV, forgot if it was NatGeo or something like that. I know they’re not reliable, but one conclusion is he was nailed in the hands, but also tied by the wrists, which would have supported his weight. Also keeping the arms up higher would mean more suffocation.

No, you would not bleed to death. It’s like a stab wound. You never take out the knife. The object actually serves as a stopper obstructing the flow of blood.

This subject is interesting as far as curiosity is concerned. It neither adds nor deletes anything from the faith or the crucifixion. Apparently, God does think it’s too important either.

St. Francis is the first known stigmatist. His wounds were on his wrists and the wounds on the feet were on the front part of the foot closest to the ankle. According to the early chroniclers, he actually had spurs that looked like nails going through them, with hooks on the opposite side. We believe these may have been some kind of cartilege. The point is that his wounds were on his wrists and the upper part of the foot, close to the ankle.

Padre Pio’s wounds were in the center of his hands and they were large sores. I don’t now about the feet or side. Both had the five wounds, but in slightly different places.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Backagain]

wrists

 

[thistle]

Hi everyone,

Yes, yes, I KNOW this questions has been asked before (like every year just before Holy Week, right?) But this time, I can’t find the old threads.

So, please answer ONLY if you can cite references to relevant factual material – I’m not in need of opinions.

The question is - Can you cite proof of Christ being crucified through either His hands or His wrists?

Thanks!

John 20:25-27

25 So the other disciples said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see** the mark of the nails in his hands **and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”
26 Now a week later his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.”
27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here and see my hands, and bring your hand and put it into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe."

 

[valentino]

verse states"they have pierced my hands and my feet and they have numbered all my bones".He surely would have died faster through the wrists.

 

[buffalo]

If the Shroud of Turin is rendered in 3d it shows through the hands.

 

[edwest2]

The main Cross over the altar in my old Church showed Him pierced through the hands. Stigmata show wounds in the hands.

Peace,
Ed

 

[patrick457]

Hi everyone,

Yes, yes, I KNOW this questions has been asked before (like every year just before Holy Week, right?) But this time, I can’t find the old threads.

So, please answer ONLY if you can cite references to relevant factual material – I’m not in need of opinions.

The question is - Can you cite proof of Christ being crucified through either His hands or His wrists?

Thanks!

Ever since Dr. Pierre Barbet conducted his experiment around the 1930s, the ‘crucified-through-the-wrists’ idea became popular. More recently, however, Dr. Frederick Zugibe has defended and proved the viability of the traditional location.

 

[JReducation]

Why is this important?

Through the palm of the hands or through the wrist, it was a barbaric way to execute someone.

I’m confused.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[patrick457]

John 20:25-27

25 So the other disciples said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see** the mark of the nails in his hands **and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”
26 Now a week later his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.”
27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here and see my hands, and bring your hand and put it into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe."

Could be, but you also need to consider the following:

Now when Herod was about to bring him out, on that very night, Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains, and sentries before the door were guarding the prison. And behold, an angel of the Lord stood next to him, and a light shone in the cell. He struck Peter on the side and woke him, saying, “Get up quickly.” And the chains fell off his hands (ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν).

-Acts 12 (ESV)

Apparently, the use of cheir in a broad sense in Acts 12:7 seems to reflect Hebrew and Aramaic usage, which seems to lack a specific term for the wrist. (There is a Greek word for wrist (karpos), but it is only used in the Greek Septuagint.) From Genesis:

And it cometh to pass when the camels have finished drinking, that the man taketh a golden ring (whose weight [is] a bekah), and two bracelets for her hands (עַל-יָדֶיהָ, ἐπὶ τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῆς) (whose weight [is] ten [bekahs] of gold), and saith, ‘Whose daughter [art] thou? declare to me, I pray thee, is the house of thy father a place for us to lodge in?’

-Genesis 24:22-23 (YLT)

 

[patrick457]

Dr. Pierre Barbet has done some research into this—you may consider reading his Doctor at Calvary (title of book). I do not know what his conclusion was. Remember that this is based on experiments he did, as well as the Shroud of Turin.

There is also Dr. Zugibe’s The Crucifixion of Jesus: A Forensic Inquiry for those who wish a more newer, somewhat up-to-date book.

 

[edwest2]

Why is this important?

Through the palm of the hands or through the wrist, it was a barbaric way to execute someone.

I’m confused.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Why are you confused? Consider the possibility that some need to discredit the Church and the Bible. Anything that helps fulfill that goal is brought up.

Peace,
Ed

 

[patrick457]

But if it were just above the wrist, wouldn’t it be akin to slitting the wrists and Jesus would have bled to death faster than the 3 hours he was on the cross?

For the record, Jesus actually died pretty fast for a victim of crucifixion: He only lasted 3-6 hours up on the cross, at the most.

I was watching one of those shows on TV, forgot if it was NatGeo or something like that. I know they’re not reliable, but one conclusion is he was nailed in the hands, but also tied by the wrists, which would have supported his weight. Also keeping the arms up higher would mean more suffocation.

This is why the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ idea of Jesus being stake-ified is not too tenable: without a support or some such, Jesus would have suffocated quickly!

Nailed to the front of the cross, a crucified man’s pelvis and chest will lunge forward away from the vertical post and lean outward because of the pull of gravity. This is why some ofthe depictions of the Crucifixion you commonly see in Western art, where Jesus manages to keep straight up and rest His back to the cross while being nailed full front.

To counteract this, you have two options: the suppedaneum or footrest (which you see in some depictions) and the sedile or seat. Whether suppedaneum were actually used is a matter of debate, but we have more historical evidence for the seat.

The presence of the sedile is included (or at least, implied) in some of the earliest images of crucifixion, ca. 2nd-3rd centuries AD (predating the ‘orthodox’ depictions of the event):

http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/8290/sedilee.png

Note the line depicted just above the buttocks of the crucified figure in the Alexamenos graffito (left): it has been interpreted variously as a representation of a short tunic, a loincloth, or - more likely IMHO - the sedile. The victim in the Puzzuoli graffito (center) has what seems to be a sedile pointing out and slanting downwards just below the man’s left leg (our right). The figure depicted on the gem has his legs spread rather obscenely wide away from the cross, kind of like a rider on horseback, which might imply a seat in place.

The Fathers who lived in the days when crucifixions were still commonplace also mention this sedile:

And God by Moses shows in another way the force of the mystery of the cross, when He said in the blessing wherewith Joseph was blessed, ‘From the blessing of the Lord is his land; for the seasons of heaven, and for the dews, and for the deep springs from beneath, and for the seasonable fruits of the sun, and for the coming together of the months, and for the heights of the everlasting mountains, and for the heights of the hills, and for the ever-flowing rivers, and for the fruits of the fatness of the earth; and let the things accepted by Him who appeared in the bush come on the head and crown of Joseph. Let him be glorified among his brethren; his beauty is [like] the firstling of a bullock; his horns the horns of an unicorn: with these shall he push the nations from one end of the earth to another.’ (Deuteronomy 33:13-17) Now, no one could say or prove that the horns of an unicorn represent any other fact or figure than the type which portrays the cross. For the one beam is placed upright, from which the highest extremity is raised up into a horn, when the other beam is fitted on to it, and the ends appear on both sides as horns joined on to the one horn. And the part which is fixed in the centre, on which are suspended those who are crucified, also stands out like a horn; and it also looks like a horn conjoined and fixed with the other horns. And the expression, ‘With these shall he push as with horns the nations from one end of the earth to another,’ is indicative of what is now the fact among all the nations.

• St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 91

The very form of the cross, too, has five extremities, two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails.

• St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 2.24.4

Every piece of timber which is fixed in the ground in an erect position is a part of a cross, and indeed the greater portion of its mass. But an entire cross is attributed to us, with its transverse beam, of course, and its projecting seat.

-Tertullian, Ad Nationes 1.12