The metal nail which Jesus crucified with.

[Sam_777]

This weekend I was watching a documentary on the History channel about one of the metal nails which Jesus had crucified with, they mentioned that the metal nail never got rusted from that day till now, even it was exposed to air and humidity, that was confirmed by many priests, can our fellow Catholics confirm that, is that one of the authenticated miracles in the CC, because that would be a tangible proof to offset (Quran 04:157).

 

[swariffin]

This weekend I was watching a documentary on the History channel about one of the metal nails which Jesus had crucified with, they mentioned that the metal nail never got rusted from that day till now, even it was exposed to air and humidity, that was confirmed by many priests, can our fellow Catholics confirm that, is that one of the authenticated miracles in the CC, because that would be a tangible proof to offset (Quran 04:157).

I have an archeological evidence that crucifiction did exist during the time of Jesus. It has the leg bone still punctured by the nail. Still has the piece of the crucifix attached to the bone by the nail. The nail indeed is a big one, more than 20 centimeters long.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I have an archeological evidence that crucifiction did exist during the time of Jesus. It has the leg bone still punctured by the nail. Still has the piece of the crucifix attached to the bone by the nail. The nail indeed is a big one, more than 20 centimeters long.

Where is the documentation for your claim? BAR maybe or a book?

SOZO’ Roman law covers the fact that nails were through the wrists and ankles for just one reliable source.

Edwards, W.D., Gabel, W.J., and Homer, F.E.: “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ.” JAMA, 1986, Vol. 255, No. 11, pp 1455-1463.

Davis, C.T., “The Crucifixion of Jesus: The Passion of Christ from a Medical Point of View.” Arizona Medicine 1965, Vol. 22, pp. 183-187.

The crucifixion of Jesus : a forensic inquiry / Frederick T. Zugibe.
Other title Forensic inquiry
Author Zugibe, Frederick T. (Frederick Thomas), 1928-
Published New York, NY : M. Evans and Co., c2005.

The gospels themselves refute the muslim claim. Who’s word are you going to take, eye witnesses who were there or some nutcase who came along 500 years later?

 

[bpbasilphx]

** is that one of the authenticated miracles in the CC, because that would be a tangible proof to offset **

**This would not in itself prove anything whatsoever about the Catholic Church. What if the Orthodox happened to have this relic, or one of the non-Chalcedonian Churches? What would it prove about them?

When the Philistines had the Ark of the Covenant, did it “prove” they were God’s chosen people?**

 

[swariffin]

Where is the documentation for your claim? BAR maybe or a book?

SOZO’ Roman law covers the fact that nails were through the wrists and ankles for just one reliable source.

Edwards, W.D., Gabel, W.J., and Homer, F.E.: “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ.” JAMA, 1986, Vol. 255, No. 11, pp 1455-1463.

Davis, C.T., “The Crucifixion of Jesus: The Passion of Christ from a Medical Point of View.” Arizona Medicine 1965, Vol. 22, pp. 183-187.

The crucifixion of Jesus : a forensic inquiry / Frederick T. Zugibe.
Other title Forensic inquiry
Author Zugibe, Frederick T. (Frederick Thomas), 1928-
Published New York, NY : M. Evans and Co., c2005.

The gospels themselves refute the muslim claim. Who’s word are you going to take, eye witnesses who were there or some nutcase who came along 500 years later?

Yes, you are right. I should say the ankle. Sorry, my mistake. Somehow, i missed the exact english word for a body part. The source did say that the man whose ankle bones were discovered definitely not Jesus’. (That is correct as Jesus was risen from the dead), because the location was wrong, but the carbon dating was correct. From what the source say, crucifiction did undeniably exist. The interesting way it says, they used a small piece of wood on top of the ankle/wrist, and they bent the tip of the nail after it pass through the cross. I can’t imagine how painful the process would be.

I do not deny the crucifiction off course, because not only it is true in theological means, it is also true as a historical fact. Those who still deny it simply has no care to dig further, or does not bother to think further.