Image of Jesus' crucifixion may be wrong, says study

[Mike_D30]

Yerusalyim:

Anyone who has done any study at all outside the bible knows that the Romans had many different ways to crucify people…this is not earth shattering.

It’s common belief among Catholics that St. Peter was crucifed upside down and St. Andrew was crucified on an X. So I agree this is not Earth shattering, especially to Catholics, I wish someone would alert the press we already knew this information.

 

[Jon_S]

The press would, no doubt, find some way to twist your words:

“Catholics knew allready that there were many different ways that one could be crucified. They just used Opus Dei and the Knights Templar to conceal this information…”

Ha-ha. One conspiracy after another, they strengthen my faith in the Catholic Church.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

mtr01:

Actually, new information has shown Barbet’s conclusions to be untenable. As you may know, Barbet’s conclusion that Christ must have been crucufied through the wrist was based on his findings (through experimentation with cadavers) that a force of 88 pounds of pressure would cause the nail to tear through the palm. Given the angle of the arms (at approx 65 degrees) during crucifixion, Barbet used mathematical formulas and found that the pressure on Christ’s hands would have been greater than 88 pounds…thus he couldn’t have been nailed through the palms.

Unfortunately his experimental findings were only valid if a crucified body were hanging by the arms only. We know this wasn’t the case in Christ’s crucifixion – his feet were also nailed to the cross. Given that the feet would bear most of the body’s weight (not the arms/hands) the pressure on the hands would actually not surpass the 88 pounds necessary to cause the nail to “slip” through the palms. As a result, the classical depiction of Christ being nailed through the palms is physiologically feasible, and for me, the most likely scenario.

Here’s the website of Frederick Zugibe, who has performed several studies that have contradicted Barbet’s conclusions: Experimental Studies in Crucifixion

Frederick Zugibe, has some holes in his study. For one, as Babet points out in his book, Roman crucifixion for the most part, did not include the feet, and so, would’ve required nailing through the wrist. Being that this was the standard, they probably would still have nailed through the wrist in Jesus case, even though his feet were also going to be nailed.

Also, the double bleed, Zugibe says that the blood would’ve had to smuge the back of the hand, but it is believed that it was raining at the time Jesus was removed from the cross. Blood would’ve been partially washed off. Also, the blood clots from the scrourging, would also have been washed off.

There are plenty of holes left in each man’s study, but more fits with the Shroud and Barbet, than Frederick Zugibe’s. INMO.

Thanks for posting the link however, it’s interesting read!

 

[mtr01]

JimR-OCDS:

Frederick Zugibe, has some holes in his study. For one, as Babet points out in his book, Roman crucifixion for the most part, did not include the feet, and so, would’ve required nailing through the wrist. Being that this was the standard, they probably would still have nailed through the wrist in Jesus case, even though his feet were also going to be nailed.

Actually, most scholarly sources on crucifixion suggest that nailing the feet to the stipes was indeed the common practice, even though the arms were nailed in various places (hands, wrists, forearms etc.). Since nailing the feet was the standard, there’s no reason to presuppose a nailing through the wrists (especially in light of Tradition and Scripture).

JimR-OCDS:

Also, the double bleed, Zugibe says that the blood would’ve had to smuge the back of the hand, but it is believed that it was raining at the time Jesus was removed from the cross. Blood would’ve been partially washed off. Also, the blood clots from the scrourging, would also have been washed off.

This really is just supposition, then again, I guess that’s all we’ve really got.

JimR-OCDS:

There are plenty of holes left in each man’s study, but more fits with the Shroud and Barbet, than Frederick Zugibe’s. INMO.

It’s probably not surprising that I disagree. However, I would like to point out that the wounds on the Shroud can indeed be reconciled with the nails being driving through Christ’s palms (Barbet Revisted). Granted, this is another Zugibe paper, but it was written before the experiments I perviously linked, while he was still laboring under Barbet’s hypothesis concerning the pressure exerted on the hands.

As a side note, I also find the idea of Christ being nailed through the wrists problematic for another reason, specifically the stigmata. It is well known that sainted stigmatics like St. Francis and Padre Pio (among others) bore the stigmata on the palms of their hands. If Christ’s wounds were really in His wrists, why would he choose to manifest them in the stigmatics in their hands?

JimR-OCDS:

Thanks for posting the link however, it’s interesting read!

My pleasure, but perhaps we will have to just agree to disagree.

 

[Flopfoot]

NotWorthy:

Guys, its when they stop persecuting us for what we believe that we really need to start worrying.

Think about it!

Notworthy

Thinking about it… can’t figure it out… what exactly do we need to worry about if they stop persecuting us? That they have taken a break to plan something worse? Or that the end of the world is coming? Or what?

 

[NotWorthy]

Flopfoot:

Thinking about it… can’t figure it out… what exactly do we need to worry about if they stop persecuting us? That they have taken a break to plan something worse? Or that the end of the world is coming? Or what?

Why should the devil waste any attempt to persecute the Church if the Church is no longer the true Church.

As long as he persecutes the Church, we know we’re doing at least something right!

Notworthy

 

[Flopfoot]

NotWorthy:

Why should the devil waste any attempt to persecute the Church if the Church is no longer the true Church.

As long as he persecutes the Church, we know we’re doing at least something right!

Notworthy

But the Church will always be the true Church… we can’t change that.
So by your reasoning then, the persecution will never end…
Which means we don’t have to worry about it stopping because it’s just not going to happen.

What if the devil takes a holiday? It might be good for all… personally I wouldn’t mind the persecution stopping every now and then…

Thing is lots of people get persecuted though… doesn’t mean that they can take it as a sign of them being right.

 

[NotWorthy]

Flopfoot,

Yes, but when I’m ridiculed for defending the teachings of the Church, I love it!

Notworthy

 

[Batjacboy]

JimR-OCDS:

For one, as Barbet points out in his book, Roman crucifixion for the most part, did not include the feet, and so, would’ve required nailing through the wrist. Being that this was the standard, they probably would still have nailed through the wrist in Jesus case, even though his feet were also going to be nailed.

Barbet’s conclusions about the nailing in the hands was all wrong.

Barbet made the mistake of putting his nails through the palms of his cadavers too far toward the knuckles. That’s why they tore out.

But the Romans knew hand anatomy better than that. If the nails were put in the palm anywhere in the lower half, the ligaments between the bones are certainly strong enough to support the man, even without nailing the feet. (For anatomy buffs, it’s any placement of the nails on the forearm side of the transmetacarpal ligaments, which are incredibly strong).

All things considered (anatomy, Scripture verses, tradition, the Shroud), the evidence is overwhelming that Christ was nailed in the palms.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Batjacboy:

Barbet’s conclusions about the nailing in the hands was all wrong.

Barbet made the mistake of putting his nails through the palms of his cadavers too far toward the knuckles. That’s why they tore out.

But the Romans knew hand anatomy better than that. If the nails were put in the palm anywhere in the lower half, the ligaments between the bones are certainly strong enough to support the man, even without nailing the feet. (For anatomy buffs, it’s any placement of the nails on the forearm side of the transmetacarpal ligaments, which are incredibly strong).

All things considered (anatomy, Scripture verses, tradition, the Shroud), the evidence is overwhelming that Christ was nailed in the palms.

Barbet confirmed through use of the image on the Shroud, that his theory was correct. He didn’t just use cadavers.

However, being neither of us are scientist, and even they don’t agree, nor do we have the mind of God, we will never come to a conclusion on the issue.

 

[Batjacboy]

Barbet confirmed through use of the image on the Shroud, that his theory was correct. He didn’t just use cadavers…

“Confirmed” is too strong a word, since his suppositions concerning the Shroud are also considered wrong.

However, being neither of us are scientist, and even they don’t agree, nor do we have the mind of God, we will never come to a conclusion on the issue.

Not so.

Several scientific studies have been done, and the conclusions are that Barbet was wrong:

About the nails in the wrists
About the position of the thumb on the Shroud
About the supposed “asphyxiation” of Christ
About the position of Christ on the Cross
etc.

If you’re going to leave it to scientists, then the recent science agrees with the anatomy of the palm, Scripture verses, tradition, and the Shroud (properly interpreted): Christ was nailed in the palms.