Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
An easier way would be to use the technology they knew very well , that of raising a yard arm on a mast with a rope.
the victim could have his arms fixed to the yard which would then be easily hoisted like a sail.
The Romans used such structures for many forms of lifting.
the upright could be a fixture.
It would have the advantage of suiting people of any height as you could hoist them till their feet were at the correct hight for fixing.
The evidence points to a cross, but I fail to see why it matters so much.
...that's much better. Thank you.An easier way would be to use the technology they knew very well , that of raising a yard arm on a mast with a rope.
the victim could have his arms fixed to the yard which would then be easily hoisted like a sail.
The Romans used such structures for many forms of lifting.
the upright could be a fixture.
It would have the advantage of suiting people of any height as you could hoist them till their feet were at the correct hight for fixing.
Ask Peg & Kolibri.Why does it even matter what he was crucified on?
The evidence points to a cross, but I fail to see why it matters so much.
Well the answer is obvious, isn't it? We're all sleeper-Catholics, waiting for the Red Smoke to issue forth from Satan's own throne in the bowels of the Vatican!It's humorous this JW is arguing about people being too attached to their traditions to change their mind... to a Jew, an agnostic, and the heathen king. In other words, no one who even revers/holds onto some cross tradition?
I'm not sure it gets more ironic. Guys, really, let go of your cross tradition. All your use of history and archeology and proper citation of scholars. Just let it go and get with the times.
Sheesh! The Watchtower says so, and there's no hint of hidden agenda or outright bible fraud in that organization!
How about, ...... The arms were lashed to the crossbar at the elbows, with (smaller) nails through palms of hands so that convict could not struggle free? The body can be tied and the feet can do what they want, since any person would place them on the rest to push up from time to time. I have read that crucifixion was intended to last about three days of crushing agony and torture, so the Romans would have been keen to check blood loss?That's not quite how Roman Crucifixion worked. The person was nailed(or rather staked, as one can't really call what they used 'nails') in the ankles & the wrists, a rope tied around the chest, and a small platform for the feet to rest on.
You're not going to struggle free to begin with. These were public executions, after all, and the individual was beaten before being put on it. At that point, it doesn't really matter. Also, from what I understand, the Romans were perfectly capable of placing the stake so that it missed arteries & bone. There's an empty space within the arm/wrist.How about, ...... The arms were lashed to the crossbar at the elbows, with (smaller) nails through palms of hands so that convict could not struggle free?
I don't know. What would they be doing by pushing themselves 'up'? I don't really see that doing anything to help their situation, honestly.The body can be tied and the feet can do what they want, since any person would place them on the rest to push up from time to time. I have read that crucifixion was intended to last about three days of crushing agony and torture, so the Romans would have been keen to check blood loss?
I've seen that bandied about, but I've never found the first bit of evidence that it was anything other than a myth or exaggeration.I heard somewhere that they nailed the gonads of their victims too.
I'm not sure of the credibility of that claim though.
I've seen that bandied about, but I've never found the first bit of evidence that it was anything other than a myth or exaggeration.
To me, it is not a matter of "having to be right". I presented my reasons for believing it was a certain way. There was and usually is a bit of back and forth discussion on it. Then as far as I am concerned, I spent enough time on it. It gets dropped.
Thought you would all like this rock solid argument. Jesus christ never existed because crucifixion is impossible according to this brilliant soul -
The Romans kept records of everything
Here is how the Romans crucified people
The Romans kept records of everything. How to set up camps, wage war, eat, etc…yes, and how to crucify People. The Christian religions show Jesus hanging on a cross. This never happened. The cross was the symbol of Nimrod who was against God.
Here is how the Romans crucified people. They nailed their hands (base of the hands) above the victims head on an upright pole. ( it was called a torture stake.) They also nailed the feet to the pole. With the victim’s hands above his head, the weight of his body made it hard to breath, and in time the victim would suffocate. Most times the Romans would break the legs of the victim so they could not hold their self up. When they had Jesus on the stake the sun was ready to go down. Under Jewish law, you could not leave a man to die during the Passover. To speed up Jesus death they speared him in the side rather than break his legs. It was written that the Messiahs legs would not be broken.
Side note: Older Bible never said cross, they said, “Torture Stake.”
Mmm, one could not carry the entire cross, no. But the crossbeam? That's quite doable.
I got something for you. Here are a set of images depicting various crucifixions.
The first one dates back to the 3rd century BCE.
This one is 2nd Century CE graffiti, depicting a woman(the picture does not show it, but there is a name above it, 'Alcimilla')
This one is one of the earliest depictions of the Nazarene's crucifixion from roughly the 3rd Century(the words are mocking a Christian named Alexamenos)
And this here is a 2nd/3rd century CE talisman of sorts, depicting Jesus
Still sure it was a stake/spike?
No they did not. Not everything.
They kept some records, most of which are all lost and do not exist.
Your providing a fraction of how they abused people. They used many ways to crucify thousands of victims.
Errr, you're the one making the claim of extensive records, it's up to you to show that they kept them.You always say not true, but you never prove anything...It's like being in an outhouse with out any paper.
I don't know. What would they be doing by pushing themselves 'up'? I don't really see that doing anything to help their situation, honestly..