Paladin D Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 Since it would've been very unlikely for them to be through there, considering it wouldn't support his body. Why not through the wrists? Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiritual_Arsonist Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 Maybe those who crafted and designed crucifixes thought the hands were a good place to put the nails. Also maybe the nails in the hands had a sybolic meaning. Since Jesus did my works (ie hands), the nails symbolize man's willingness to reject Christ's way of life. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IXpenguin21 Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 there's no hebrew/aramaic/'origional language' word for wrist. their word for hand coverd from the elbow to the tips of the fingers. when the translaters translated the texts, the best word they could use in it's place was "hand". when renesance (horrible spelling) and other artists were commissoned to create images for cathedrals and churches, they put the nails exactly as it read. leo devinci, smart guy as he was, tried to crucify a corpse as it said in the gospels, believing that it wasn't possible and the nails would slip through the fingers. sure enough, they did. he then tried the wrist and solved the problem. all of his depictions after this experiment show the nail holes throught the wrists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 Not that this would determine anything . . . but Padre Pios stigmata were at the base of his hands . . . just food for thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 stigmata always shows up on the hands because it's not sposedta be a mortal wound. Christ was crucified to kill him, stigmata isn't meant to kill, but bring them closer to the cross. not to actually put them on the cross, not to actually kill them. but to bring them close enough to suffer with Him. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanHooty Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 Well, actually, there have been experiments done. And it is *possible* to nail someone to the cross through the hands if their knees are bent and properly supported. Granted, IIRC, that wasn't how the Romans did it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.SIGGA Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 I don't think the scientific stuff matters. Doesn't the Bible say Thomas believed after touching the holes in His hands and in his side? This is all that matters right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Again . . . there is no aramaic word for wrist . . . so he would have used the word for hands . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted November 17, 2003 Author Share Posted November 17, 2003 Okiedoke, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Gus Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Well, actually, there have been experiments done. And it is *possible* to nail someone to the cross through the hands if their knees are bent and properly supported. Granted, IIRC, that wasn't how the Romans did it anyway. No, that isn't how it was done, because that would defeat the purpose. Along with the nails through the hands, most curcifixes seem to have a little support block for Jesus' feet, too. The whole idea of crucifixion is to suffocate the victim to death. When hanging by your distended arms, your ribcage is stretched apart and your lungs are involuntarily expanded. In order to breath out, you must force yourself upwards against the nail through your foot. This is why, in order to make the crucified victims die quicker, the soldiers broke their legs, rendering them incapable of suporting themselves, and thus suffocating. This is one reason why I really like the Papl crucifix, because it shows Jesus hanging down from his arms, as He really would have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 There is some serious debate on this, there is evidence that some times the romans did support peoples legs so that it would take them longer to die, it is also possable that his wrist were tied and the nails driven through his hand, there is also some evidence that sometimes the romans used a piece of wood and drove the nail through that, that would redistribute the wieght and allow the nail to have been driven through the hand itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.SIGGA Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 There is some serious debate on this, there is evidence that some times the romans did support peoples legs so that it would take them longer to die, it is also possable that his wrist were tied and the nails driven through his hand, there is also some evidence that sometimes the romans used a piece of wood and drove the nail through that, that would redistribute the wieght and allow the nail to have been driven through the hand itself. Yep, I think you are right. If you notice there is a little footstool under Jesus feet on the crucifix which was part of the torture for the person to have to lift themselves up in order to breath - this was more tortuous for Jesus b/c his hands and feet were nailed so pain was intensified. On Eastern Orthodox Crosses the footstool is slanted to show an even higher degree of torture b/c it would have been even more painful for out savior to have to lift the weight of his body on a slanted, splintery footstool in order to breath. They probably were not little carpenter nails either, but large stakes of some kind - whether the hand or the wrist was used, I'm sure the Ancient Romans perfected crucufixion methods of execution by Jesus' time so he wouldn't have fallen off the cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donna Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 At the base of the palm...more what'd be called the wrist. Barbet ("A Doctor At Calvary") did the experiments... There're a bunch of nerve endings there that make it more excruciating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp15 Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 (edited) This whole debate is gonna rear it's head again once the "Passion" comes out. I do believe that Mel depicts Christ being nailed through the hands. Edited November 17, 2003 by mp15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted November 17, 2003 Author Share Posted November 17, 2003 I do believe that Mel depicts Christ being nailed through the hands. Yes he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now