How do you think the Crucifixion really happened?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spyder1jcd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Spyder1jcd

Guest
Greetings!

After a few years of research, I have come to a very different idea of how the crucifixion happened than how it is traditionally presented. What do YOU think?
 
What are we talking here?

day or time it happened
who was there
type of wooden implement used (shape of the cross)
method of death (blood loss, lack of oxygen, etc)
placement of the nails in the hands or wrists
who was responsible for it happening
whether or not it actually did happen at all
etc.

I guess there seem to be so many options.
 
I believe it happened and it was WORSE than what Mel Gibson portrayed in his film.
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
I believe it happened and it was WORSE than what Mel Gibson portrayed in his film.
Click to expand...
That is correct. A Roman historian was quoted as saying that the scourging and crucifixion scene in Mel Gibson’s film was inaccurate, it would have been worse!
 
From my little research on Roman crucifixion, such as was done to the slaves of the Spartacus uprising, crucifixion was reserved for slaves and foreigners and some criminals if no forum was available; Roman citizens were not to be crucified.

There were at least three types of crosses used for crucifixion, and different methods of attachment to that cross, whether nailed through various parts of the anatomy or simply lashed on with rope.

The legs were usually broken to hasten death, or a spear was shoved in and up through the thorax. The guys usually lasted days or hours depending on the moods of the Romans at the time.

The Greeks were also known to have used crucifixion before the rise of Rome.

The crucifixion of Christ as described in the Gospel seems to have been accurately portrayed.
 
Kevin Walker:
That is correct. A Roman historian was quoted as saying that the scourging and crucifixion scene in Mel Gibson’s film was inaccurate, it would have been worse!
Click to expand...
I am sure for ‘film rating and standards’ that the scourging and crucifixion had to be toned down.

Just imagine with computer enhancement, how GRAPHIC the scenes really could have been.
…“He was marred beyond human…”
Yet NO bones were broken!
A miracle not mentioned much, or sought out. (A miracle right under their noses).
 
40.png
Pug:
What are we talking here?

day or time it happened
who was there
type of wooden implement used (shape of the cross)
method of death (blood loss, lack of oxygen, etc)
placement of the nails in the hands or wrists
who was responsible for it happening
whether or not it actually did happen at all
etc.

I guess there seem to be so many options.
Click to expand...
Basically shape of the cross, how much of it was carried, the shape of the crown of thorns, placement of the nails, and how the scourging actually happened. If you want a reference of “traditional,” look at “The Passion of the Christ” or the Stations of the Cross images you find in your church or anywhere else around you. I define traditional as:

*full, “t” shaped cross
*wreathlet crown of thorns
*nailed through the palms

For the scourging, it can vary. Most images have very little wounds and blood. Others sources, such as “The Passion of the Christ,” depict Him as a torn up, bloody mess.
 
Scripture tells us how it happened. I believe scripture.
maggiec
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
I am sure for ‘film rating and standards’ that the scourging and crucifixion had to be toned down.

Just imagine with computer enhancement, how GRAPHIC the scenes really could have been.
…“He was marred beyond human…”
Yet NO bones were broken!
A miracle not mentioned much, or sought out. (A miracle right under their noses).
Click to expand...
Not really. Actually, the result of the scouring would’ve probably resembled this:
ilumina.com/downloads/wallpaper/1600x1200/jesus_cross_D_1600x1200.jpg
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
I am sure for ‘film rating and standards’ that the scourging and crucifixion had to be toned down.

Just imagine with computer enhancement, how GRAPHIC the scenes really could have been.
…“He was marred beyond human…”
Yet NO bones were broken!
A miracle not mentioned much, or sought out. (A miracle right under their noses).
Click to expand...
There is something else about Christ’s crucifixion which I have been meditating over.

In a debate at a Harvard Divinity School lecture last year with three Muslims who each had a separate argument of why Jesus survived the crucifixion, I disagreed with the Muslim physician who not only minimalized the scourging and spearing, but said that Jesus was a young man and would have survived the ordeal - that Jesus was unconscious but alive when they removed him from the cross.

My counter argument was that at the time of Christ, the average life span for a Roman citizen was 25 years and 50% of Romans died before their 10th birthday (Archeological Review magazine); therefore if Jesus was between 27 and 33 years old during his crucifixion experience, Jesus was not a young man but an old man and could not have survived the ordeal. The Muslim physician never considered the average life span 2,000 years ago. Today in the USA the average lifespan is 73 years (I think).

So, in my humble opinion, the human body of Jesus was an upper middle aged to old man on the day of his crucifixion, and that should also have been portrayed in THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST.
 
Kevin Walker:
There is something else about Christ’s crucifixion which I have been meditating over.

In a debate at a Harvard Divinity School lecture last year with three Muslims who each had a separate argument of why Jesus survived the crucifixion, I disagreed with the Muslim physician who not only minimalized the scourging and spearing, but said that Jesus was a young man and would have survived the ordeal - that Jesus was unconscious but alive when they removed him from the cross.

My counter argument was that at the time of Christ, the average life span for a Roman citizen was 25 years and 50% of Romans died before their 10th birthday (Archeological Review magazine); therefore if Jesus was between 27 and 33 years old during his crucifixion experience, Jesus was not a young man but an old man and could not have survived the ordeal. The Muslim physician never considered the average life span 2,000 years ago. Today in the USA the average lifespan is 73 years (I think).

So, in my humble opinion, the human body of Jesus was an upper middle aged to old man on the day of his crucifixion, and that should also have been portrayed in THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST.
Click to expand...
That is strange that muslims would say such a thing becuase Islam teaches that Jesus was not crucified at all.

Islam teaches that God took Jesus up into Heaven bodily and made Judas appear as Jesus. So it was Judas who was really crucified. At least that is what Islam teaches.

From the Koran (bold emphasis added)

4:157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

As you can see, surah 4:157 says that they did not crucify him.
40.png
Spyder1jcd:
asically shape of the cross, how much of it was carried, the shape of the crown of thorns, placement of the nails, and how the scourging actually happened. If you want a reference of “traditional,” look at “The Passion of the Christ” or the Stations of the Cross images you find in your church or anywhere else around you. I define traditional as:

*full, “t” shaped cross
*wreathlet crown of thorns
*nailed through the palms

For the scourging, it can vary. Most images have very little wounds and blood. Others sources, such as “The Passion of the Christ,” depict Him as a torn up, bloody mess.
Click to expand...
That is fine but can you show where the Church has an offical teaching on any of these.

Can I ask what the purpose of this is post is?
 
If I hear just one whisper of Christ being impaled on a Greek torture pole, I am going to report the poster for proselytizing Jehovah Witness rubbish.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
That is strange that muslims would say such a thing becuase Islam teaches that Jesus was not crucified at all.

Islam teaches that God took Jesus up into Heaven bodily and made Judas appear as Jesus. So it was Judas who was really crucified. At least that is what Islam teaches.
Click to expand...
The two versions I have been taught was that Jesus was saved on the cross by the angel Gabriel; and that there was a substitute for Jesus, his brother James.

I own two versions of the Qui’ran/ Koran which I don’t have with me at this public terminal at the moment.

At this particular divinity school lecture there were three American Black Muslim presenters that Jesus survived his crucifixion: A Muslim mullah, a medical doctor, and a Muslim divinity student (all three were from Philadelphia).

The muslim doctor actually described Jesus’s crucifixion and claimed he was unconscious but very much alive when he was brought down. It was this presenter which I debated.

Maybe the American Black Muslims have differed their versions from the Sunnis or Shiites?
 
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
If I hear just one whisper of Christ being impaled on a Greek torture pole, I am going to report the poster for proselytizing Jehovah Witness rubbish.
Click to expand...
This is a curious point - I had never heard this claim before. I’ll have to read up on this bizarre notion.

As for reporting someone, what would be the point of that? JW’s are free to believe what they will, and a JW as a good forum member could answer the question posed. Although I’m not sure that a JW that was true to his faith could be surfing around on the internet, especially at a Catholic message board.
 
Kevin Walker:
There is something else about Christ’s crucifixion which I have been meditating over.

In a debate at a Harvard Divinity School lecture last year with three Muslims who each had a separate argument of why Jesus survived the crucifixion, I disagreed with the Muslim physician who not only minimalized the scourging and spearing, but said that Jesus was a young man and would have survived the ordeal - that Jesus was unconscious but alive when they removed him from the cross.

My counter argument was that at the time of Christ, the average life span for a Roman citizen was 25 years and 50% of Romans died before their 10th birthday (Archeological Review magazine); therefore if Jesus was between 27 and 33 years old during his crucifixion experience, Jesus was not a young man but an old man and could not have survived the ordeal. The Muslim physician never considered the average life span 2,000 years ago. Today in the USA the average lifespan is 73 years (I think).

So, in my humble opinion, the human body of Jesus was an upper middle aged to old man on the day of his crucifixion, and that should also have been portrayed in THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST.
Click to expand...
Although I agree with your conclusion I have a problem with that arguement. The OT states a long life is 80 years and a blessing which is consistent with modern lifespans. Wouldn’t you think that the average lifespan 2000 yrs ago was lower than today because of the death rate before 10 years of age?
 
40.png
Benadam:
Although I agree with your conclusion I have a problem with that arguement. The OT states a long life is 80 years and a blessing which is consistent with modern lifespans. Wouldn’t you think that the average lifespan 2000 yrs ago was lower than today because of the death rate before 10 years of age?
Click to expand...
Yes, but the Muslim medical doctor was being scientifically objective and was referring to the Historical Jesus. So I used scientific data to counter his argument. Scientists, actually physical anthropologists, have measured the hundreds of thousands of skeletons produced by Rome’s violent society and figured that the average lifespan for the Joe Average Roman was ~25 years old, and that half of Romans died before they were ten years old. The world population was only about 300 million at the time of Rome.

The other Muslim presenter, a Mullah, whom I did not debate, gave the religious reasons why Islam believes Christ did not die by crucixion, and for that I would have used OT data as counter evidence.
 
Kevin Walker:
Yes, but the Muslim medical doctor was being scientifically objective and was referring to the Historical Jesus. So I used scientific data to counter his argument. Scientists, actually physical anthropologists, have measured the hundreds of thousands of skeletons produced by Rome’s violent society and figured that the average lifespan for the Joe Average Roman was ~25 years old, and that half of Romans died before they were ten years old. The world population was only about 300 million at the time of Rome.

.
Click to expand...
Aaahh, ok. I wonder, do you think that the average 30 year old back then experienced their body like a person in their 50-60’s would today? I have always considered Christ’s age when He experienced death as having a meaning attached to perfect life and the reaching of some kind of fullness of the flesh. If He experienced His body as an old man that would blow that concept. 🤓
 
40.png
ByzCath:
That is fine but can you show where the Church has an offical teaching on any of these.

Can I ask what the purpose of this is post is?
Click to expand...
I don’t know of any official teachings by the Church on these. After all, the Church is focused on the “why,” not the “how.”

As for the purpose: It’s just that the Roman tradition of crucifixion during Jesus’ time was a little different from what is commonly presented. I want to know how many people out there agree with this traditional view and how many are like me, and believe the concrete evidence presented to me. For instance, I believe:

*Jesus did not have a crown of thorns like the one commonly depicted. Instead of a wreathlet, the crown would’ve actually been more of a cap, backed up by two things: 1.) The wounds on the Shroud of Turin suggest thorn contact all over the head, and 2.) during Jesus’ time, a crown would’ve looked like a cap.

*Jesus did not carry a full cross. He only carried the patibulum, or horizontal crossbar, to Golgotha. This alone was 150 pounds. The full thing was impossible for one many to carry as a result was not. The vertical section, or stipes, was permenantly fixated in the ground at the execution site.

*Jesus was not crucified on a “t” shaped, or Latin, cross. During Jesus’ time, the Romans would’ve used the “T” shaped, or Tau, cross. Then titulus, which read the description of the criminal and crime, had a wooden stake attached to it, like our political signs today, and this was nailed to the top of the cross.

*Jesus was not nailed through the palms. The muscles of that particular area just couldn’t hold the full weight of the body. The nail was placed through the depression just below the heel of the hand, and pierced the median nerve, which caused extreme pain and discomfort for the victim.

But apparently, that’s just me.
 
Nope, not just you. I have wondered if Jesus carried a crossbar only.

I wonder about the wounds of Christ. There is also the evidence of what kind of stigmata people have carried. But maybe the stigmata locations vary. I don’t know enough to say. Of course, some depictions of the event have Jesus sort of tied onto the cross as well as nailed, so that would hold up the weight. I have also seen little shelf like things shown on the main vertical pole to hold weight. I don’t know what the official call on this point is, if any.
 
Kevin Walker:
The two versions I have been taught was that Jesus was saved on the cross by the angel Gabriel; and that there was a substitute for Jesus, his brother James.

I own two versions of the Qui’ran/ Koran which I don’t have with me at this public terminal at the moment.

At this particular divinity school lecture there were three American Black Muslim presenters that Jesus survived his crucifixion: A Muslim mullah, a medical doctor, and a Muslim divinity student (all three were from Philadelphia).

The muslim doctor actually described Jesus’s crucifixion and claimed he was unconscious but very much alive when he was brought down. It was this presenter which I debated.

Maybe the American Black Muslims have differed their versions from the Sunnis or Shiites?
Click to expand...
If they are of the Nation of Islam then yes they are different. I do not think that the Sunni and the Shiites even think of the Nation as muslim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top