It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Jesus crucified or hanged?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 8 2004 @ 03:36 PM

Originally posted by DaTruth
So either the bible is full of contradictions or Jesus is not God. Which one do you choose?!?!?

How about both?

Yeshua actually was/is God; but not in the exoteric way that many Christians believe.


[Edited on 8-3-2004 by Tamahu]

posted on Mar, 8 2004 @ 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Tamahu
Yeshua actually was/is God; but not in the exoteric way that many Christians believe.

You could say exactly the same thing about the way the Jews believed in Yeshua. He was really nothing more than a storm god if you look at the way that they have depicted him in the latter parts of the OT.

posted on Mar, 9 2004 @ 06:09 AM
i see your a muslim!

Yes they dont agree in ways i can be ashamed of fellow christians. This is believed to be due to the devil combating the truth and perverting it.

Jesus is clearly presented in the bible as crucified, as was the common method of killing a criminal by the romans at that period of time

and only that period of time as it was popular for long

posted on May, 31 2004 @ 11:28 PM
Well, He was hanged by His .hands. and .feet. with nails on a cross made from a tree.

Remember the Gospels?

Never frobnicate without first grokking.

posted on May, 31 2004 @ 11:43 PM
may i reply to your comments?

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 02:01 AM
For all we know, he was drowned. It doesn't matter, what's to say he is real in the first place? What kind of idiots are going to kill someone, then after they're dead, make a religion about them? And dont tell me that the bible is evidence, cause that little book (that's exactly what it is) has been changed and re-written so many times, im surprised that Bush hasn't tried to claim some right in it.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 02:29 AM
Crucifixion was the most common form of execution during the Roman times. As for the debate of Jesus being hanged or crucified, I will say you are right that in some scriptures it refers to Jesus being "hung from a tree". But in many others it states that he was crucified. I think why there are some descriptions saying "hung from a tree" is merely a choice of descriptive terms to relate the event by the speaker thereof. What you are debating is not really a strong point to debate as the scriptures uses the term crucified many times in reference to the execution of Jesus.

God Bless

posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:02 AM
I once did an in depth study of Roman crucifixion and discovered some really interesting things.

1. The "cross" was a capital T, not a t
2. The victim never died of blood loss but, alway suffocated -- usually over a period of 2 to 3 days.

Original crucifixions had the victim tied to the cross bar with feet unsupported. This was abandoned because the victim died too quickly. The feet were then tied to the upright at the ankle. The victim eventually died but not quick enough for the proper impact.

The final manifestation that lasted the longest was the method used during the alledged time of Jesus and until the end of the Roman empire. The upright had a pin on it vertically in the center of the top that fit through a hole in the middle of the cross piece. The upright was always left firmly in the ground (the victim never carried their own cross). The victim was laid on the ground and nailed through the wrists to the cross piece. The cross piece was picked up on either end and placed on the pin on the upright. The upright was just barely taller than a normal man. The victim's feet were nailed to an angle piece that could be adjusted for height. The nailing usually produced a lot of screaming and moaning. The blood was good for show.

The victim hung until is was hard to breath and then pushed themselves up with their feet. When they couldn't stand the pain in their feet, they let themselves down again. This goes on for a couple of days. This type of punishment was for deterent affect and was never quick.

When you understand the reality of the process, it kind of takes the steam out of the Bible.

Of course, when you quit asking why and pay more attention to how, a lot of things lose their mystery.

posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:30 AM
A historical note:

The term “hang on a tree” was an idiom for crucifixion during the first century A.D. when Acts was written.
In simple speak it's slang. Yes, they used slang back then.


A person is hanged, not hung, you always hang a person, never hung.

Edit: Why not add Deuteronomy 21:23 "it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree" Why would Jesus be cursed?!
What kind of father, expecialy God could do that to his son, expecially Jesus. I've proven the whole of christianity wrong...Oh Never mind, Galations 3:13 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us.."

[Edited on 4-6-2004 by zero_snaz]

posted on Jun, 7 2004 @ 04:49 AM
Well, the argument that just because the Koran states Jesus was hung from a tree is a moot one. Forget the Koran for a moment and go to the King James Bible.

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree.

You can also find mention of a tree elsewhere in Acts and also in Peter.

As you can see, there is a massive precedent for Illmatic's argument from Christianity itself. But as far as I am aware there actually is no distinction in the Hebrew language between a tree and a cross. To Hebrew speakers they are one and the same.

The interesting point about the Acts quotations though is the word "and" in both cases. As it is written it would seem that Jesus was slain first and then hung on the tree/cross. Of course, this is contradicted elsewhere in the Bible with Jesus clearly alive on the cross but it does show the inconsistencies within the Bible.

Also of interest is the fact that if Jesus died on the cross he would have died of suffocation. The chest pushes down on the lungs and the victim cannot breathe. Yet in Mark 15:37 we are told that Jesus spoke "with a loud voice" just as he died.

It is possible that the confusion over tree and cross were deliberately created. As stated, the Hebrews had no word for an execution cross, but the Bible's translators would have understood it's meaning perfectly - they're hardly going to miss a translation error in one of the most important parts of the Jesus story, are they?. So why leave it in? Perhaps this is because many Pagan messiah figures were executed on both trees and crosses.

posted on Jun, 7 2004 @ 11:10 PM
As far as Jesus not Being God...
Try looking at it like this.

Is the Yoke of an egg different from the egg white? Are they both Different from the shell? Is it all not an egg?

Jesus, God the Son is different from God, God the Father which are different from the Holy Spirt (God the Holy Ghost). All together they make up ONE God. Just as an egg has 3 parts to be an egg, God has 3 parts to be GOD

posted on Jun, 9 2004 @ 08:25 AM

Originally posted by zero_snaz
As far as Jesus not Being God...
Try looking at it like this.

Is the Yoke of an egg different from the egg white? Are they both Different from the shell? Is it all not an egg?

Jesus, God the Son is different from God, God the Father which are different from the Holy Spirt (God the Holy Ghost). All together they make up ONE God. Just as an egg has 3 parts to be an egg, God has 3 parts to be GOD

Quote///In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and

the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All

things were made by him; and without him was not anything made

that was made... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among

us...” (John 1:1-3, 14).

“Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh” (1 Tim. 3:16). The

unutterable, unknowable, invisible, unattainable God, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity,

became man in the form of the God-Man, the Lord Jesus Christ, and dwelt among men on earth.

The preaching of the God-Manhood of the incarnate Son of God constitutes the content of

the words of the Saviour Himself, the content of the whole message of good tidings announced

by the Apostles, the essence of the four Gospels and all of the Apostolic writings, the foundation

of Christianity, and the foundation of the teaching of the Church.

Quote//Just as the blood of the sacrificed lamb kept the angel of death away from the Hebrews (Ex. 12: 3-49)
so it is Christ's sacrifice as the New Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7) and His blood allows us to "pass from death to life." (John 5:24)

Also read......Christ's crucifixion, death and resurrection

posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 02:53 PM
Don't forget the highly symbolic usage of Greek words in the New Testment, which were ultimately derived from the Hebrew of the Old Testament: it is dangerous for modern readers to take every loosely translated phrase ifrom the Greek of the NT nto English literally since most of the phrases were carefully crafted with "theology" in mind, not "history"

The note that "the legs of the seditionists were broken, but the legs of Iesous were not broken" according to John's gospel was specifically mentioned to show that "not a bone of him (the passover Lamb) shall be broken" i.e. Iesous as the "perfect Paschal sacrifice" etc.

Also he comes up with the story of the Centurion ("longinus" means "spear man" in Greek and Latin) poking the body with a lance and draws attention to another OT verse: They shall look upon him whom they Pierced.

Presumably if he was "nailed" to a cross he would have already been "pierced", but the writer wanted the verse to read "THEY LOOKED UPON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED" meaning the SAME ones who piereced were the SAME ones who were looking at the body, etc. Either way, the words of the gospels carry theolgical connotations, not literal history.

In the book of Hezekiel it says: "Behold the Princes are being Suspended by their Hands" in the last days, and there are many old testament verses which gave details to the crucifixion story in Midrashic fashion (e.g. Isaiah 53, and Psalm 22) where each detail is "fulfilled" in Iesous as part of some kind of Divine plan to answer the nagging question: Why did the Messiah die on a cross when he was supposed to Overthrow the Romans?

The Gospels were the result of this kind of questioning, John's gospel: "these things were written in order that ye might believe that Iesous is the Christ and thereby believing, have life in his name"

Not exactly the modern positivistic Historical approach by any stretch.

Now for : Tree verses cross: hung versus nailed.

Paul used to write theological things like "he became a Curse for us, since it is written: Cursed is every man who is hung upon a tree..."

The writer of 2 Peter and others that used the word "hang upon the tree" seem to be deliberatey trying to conjure up the Tree Image and the Forbidden Fruit Story in the Garden of Eden (i.e. symbolic usage of the term Tree for theological-soteriological reasons).

It is possible that Judaeans used to stone people for blasphemy AND THEN HANG THEM ON TREES, but it looks like the Romans were the ones in the Gospels who executed "Jeeezuz" (R. Yehoshua bar Yosef, the Galilean) for breech of LEX MAIESTATIS (the socalled No King but Caesar Law, which was punishable for non-citizens by Crucifixion. Citizens of Rome got beheaded or were given the choice of drinking poison.)

But in the case of the anonymous writer of 2 Peter (whoever he was) it is clearly a Theological interpretation of "hanging on a tree" that is being evoked. You could also translate the Greek word as "suspended from the tree" which could also apply to Crucifixion since the stakes were made of wood, and often the base piece (vertical) was an actual tree stump to which a wooden cross or X piece was attached. So A Tree Trunk may have been used in the actual crucifixion process.

However, the 4 Gospels all circulated anonymously without names for 200 uears, and none of the 4 gospels in the "bible" in their PRESNT FORM were written by eyewitnesses to the events they relate, so we don't REALLY know the whole scenario of the crucifixion in much detail: after all, "all the disciples left him and fled in panic" fearing arrest and a similar fate to their teacher (perhaps part of the crucifixion narrative of John's gospel which speaks of blood and urine-water flowing from the "body" on the cross was an exception since the margin of that sentence said: "these are the words of one who has seen these events", to which some one added below it "and we know that his witness is true").

There were 10 or 20 ways Romans used to crucify political seditionists who armed their disciples with swords, the way "Iesous" did before his Arrest on the Hill. Sometimes on Walls, sometimes on Crosses of differing shapes, sometimes on Trees. Mostly they used a foot rest to keep the body from tearing off, and to prolong the agony of suffocation. They also used the socalled Sedilla (which was a spike protruding from the inside of the vertical beam and placed inside the anal cavity---which also supported the body in a particularly demeaning way: "take your seat upon the Cross" was a popular insult of the day)

It takes about 70 hours to kill someone on a cross unless they are particularly weakened (i.e. half dead to start with) or if they had their legs broken, which would cause the lungs to collapse and death would follow in 5 miunutes or less.

The writers of the NT who used "tree" instead of "cross" were making verbal parallels with the Old Testament and the Genesis stories of original sin.

Just as the Tree of Knowlegde caused Adam to sin, so being "hung upon the Tree" at Golgoltha was supposed to (on some theological level) mean that the Son of Adam (son of Man) was some how "undoing" the original Sin in Eden, so that "man may again enter Paradise" (cf: what was said in Luke's gospel to the "seditionist on the right hand side" : Amen Amen I say unto you, this very day you shall be with ME in the GARDEN which the gospel writers chose the persian loan word PARDES (paradise, or park). What "Iesous" might have meant is that "you will die just as I will and we will BOTH be buried in that garden over there before the day is over..."

The cross was later regarded as a sort of Anti Eden, and use of TREE instead of CROSS was probably delilberate: although this "soteriology" (the socalled "saving power interpretation" of the death of someone, especially a holy person or a martyr) was a later development coming some 10 to 20 years after the event of the execution of "Iesous".

Either way, "hanging-suspending" should not rule out "death by crucifixion" since these verbs both could easily refer to a person "nailed to a cross" since the victim is literally being suspended by the arms and legs fastened in some way to posts.

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 08:38 AM
Hey, DaTruth. In all your verses to show that Jesus was not God you left out John 10:30, where Jesus says "I and My Father are one." Whoops, there goes your argument.

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 01:29 PM
jesus couldnt have been hanged but it is possible that he was hung or crucified.

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 01:42 PM
lol, talk about reaching.

Crucifixtion was the most popular form of punishment given back then. According to many bible scholars the depictions of Jesus' death are the most accurate stories in the bible.

He was crucified, not hanged (by the neck). Like many people have said in this thread before, when you're just hang there. I don't think they gave you a pillow and chair.

Come now, you can do better...

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 05:09 PM

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Crucifixtion was the most popular form of punishment given back then. According to many bible scholars the depictions of Jesus' death are the most accurate stories in the bible.

No it wasn't. Show me a source.
Crucifixion was the last resort of capital punishment. Most other offences - and certainly those that were punished by Jewish authorities - were punished with stoning.
As for your accurate story? There are many irregularities that surround the crucifixion. Not least is the suprisingly short time it took Jesus to die. As you have read elsewhere in this thread, victims normally had their knees broken to quicken their end. This didn't happen to Jesus.

Most of the gospels don't even agree with each other over what happened!!!
Read the Bible before you make your claim.

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 05:16 PM
Christ was crucified on a cross nailed through the wrists and through the feet as was the custom of the Romans.

1 Peter 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

Acts 5:30The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Original word- kremavnnumi
Transliterated- kemannumi
Word Origin- a prolonged form of a primary verb
1. To hang up, suspend
2. To be suspended, to hang
a. used of one hanging on a cross
b. used of the law and the prophets, they is summed up or hanging
on two precepts.

Original Word- xuvlon
Transliterated- xulon
Word Origin- from another form of the base of (3582)
1. wood
a. that which is made of wood
1. as a beam from which anyone is suspended, a gibbet, a cross
2. a log or timbers with holes in which the feet, hands, neck of
prisoners were inserted and fastened with thongs
3. a fetter, or shackle for the feet
4. a cudgel, stick, staff

2. a tree

I got this from an online bible site where you can click on the word in a verse and it will give you the Greek or Hebrew word meaning, it makes it alot easier than digging out all your books, if anyone is interested the web address is:

Christians don't have a problem with these little things, it's the proactive non-believers that like to pick everything apart and then say there is no God or if there is a God he contradicts himself all the time. Not true, the english language slaughters the original Hebrew and Greek.

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 05:36 PM
The Roman cross is not fiction or allegory or any other excuse you may have not to beoieve what happened to Jesus. Every single person that hung on a cross suffered terribly, out of all the people who was killed in this way only one came off that cross with all his bones intact, that was Jesus. It was the crucifixion procedure for all who were crucified to have their legs broken, but in the OT when God gave the command for the preparing of the sacrificial lamb He said they could not break any of it's bones. Here is an excerpt from the book 'Resurrection of the Shroud', by Mark Antonacci:



Facial and Head Wounds

The man on the Shroud has a mustache, beard, and hair that falls to his shoulders from a central part. His cheeks appear swollen, and the area below the right cheek contains a triangular-shaped wound.2 On close examination, his nose, which is bruised and swollen, shows a slight deviation that indicates the cartilage may be separated from the bone.3 Microscopic study also reveals that scratches and dirt are on the nose.4 The areas above and below each eye, especially the right eye, look swollen. And the face appears to have been beaten with a hard object (such as a fist or stick) and/or injured in a fall. The man’s eyes are closed, and small round objects seem to lie on top of them. (Chapters 3, 6, 9 and 10 discuss in greater detail the three-dimensional studies of the face and eye area; see fig. 6.)
A number of wounds are visible on the top, middle, and sides of the man’s forehead. Altogether, more than a dozen blood flows have been counted on the front of the head alone (see fig. 7). The blood marks associated with the frontal head wounds seem to run in different directions from their points of origin, which suggests the head was in different positions as the blood was flowing.
Circling the top and middle of the back of the head is another series of blood marks (see fig. 8). Since these scalp wounds are covered by hair, the exact number of blood rivulets is difficult to determine, but Dr. Sebastiano Rodante has identified as many as twenty separate blood flows on the back of the head (see fig. 9), which brings the total number of head wounds to more than thirty.5 Like the frontal image head wounds, the dorsal blood flows also run in different directions, until they seem to stop along a concave line just below the middle of the head. Above this line, wounds can be seen in the middle and near the top of the back of the head. When considered with the wounds evident on the top, middle, and sides of the forehead, the head wounds give the impression that the man was wearing something like a cap made of sharp, pointed objects. Several physicians have noted that a cap made of thorns would produce head wounds identical to those on the man in the Shroud.6

Hand and Arm Wounds

The man’s left wrist has been wounded or pierced, and blood flows from the wrist area toward the left elbow. Although the right wrist is covered by the left hand, similar blood flows are also visible extending along the right forearm toward the elbow. As shown in figure 10, both forearm blood flows run in two nearly parallel streams, with one stream measuring approximately 65 degrees from the horizontal axis of the arm and the other stream measuring about 55 degrees from the horizontal axis.7 these unusual blood marks flowing from the wrists toward the elbows proved to be an important piece of evidence, helping physicians determine that the man on the Shroud had been crucified. During crucifixion, a victim’s hands would be higher than his head. Since the blood flows from the pierced wrists toward the elbows of the man in the Shroud, we know that his arms were elevated, not hanging at his sides, while his wrists were bleeding.
The two parallel streams running at slightly different angles from the horizontal are also significant. Because of the hanging position, a person being crucified can exhale only if he pushes himself up with his feet to raise his shoulders and expand the ribcage. This movement alters the horizontal axis of the arms by approximately 10 degrees (see fig. 11). Pushing upward in this fashion would temporarily lessen some of the constant pain in the victim’s wrists and arms, but it would increase the pressure and pain in his feet. While this up-and-down motion was arduous, it did allow a crucifixion victim to breathe and forestall inevitable death—at least until he was too exhausted or in too much pain to push himself up anymore. Often, the executioners would break the legs of the crucified to stop this movement and hasten death. However, the legs of the man in the Shroud were not broken.

Scourge Marks

The man’s front and back, from shoulders to lower legs, are covered with an estimated one hundred or more scourge marks.8 these dumbbell-shaped patterns, which are most noticeable on the dorsal image, generally run parallel and diagonal across the body in groups of two or three (see fig.12). Although all are approximately the same size, these scourge marks vary in intensity from light contusions to deep punctures, and close examination reveals the presence of blood in many of them.9
Because the scourge marks have two lobes (see fig.13), these wounds must have been inflicted with a bifid instrument. The form and distribution of these marks led medical examiners of the Shroud to believe they were caused by a whip or cord-like device containing metal or some other sharp object at the end capable of tearing flesh. In particular, these wounds match, in size and shape, the Roman flagrum (shown in fig. 14).10 The flagrum, a whip used for flagellation, had pellets of lead (or sometimes bone) at the end of a pair of leather thongs. These unusual marks and their similarity to the flagrum led medical experts to conclude that the man in the Shroud must have been whipped or scourged.
Since the scourge marks are more visible on the dorsal view, physicians further believe the man was whipped from behind. The central point from which the blows radiate is a little higher on the victim’s right side than on his left, so two men probably carried out the beating; further, it seems the ‘scourger’ standing to the right was taller and tended to lash more at the man’s legs in addition to his back. The scourge marks decrease in number and depth toward the ankle, where some fade into lines visible only under ultraviolet light.11 Since the man’s arms, head, and feet seem to be the only areas that escaped scourging, we can assume that either his arms were elevated above his body during the scourging, or that his hands were tied to a post or pillar in front of him while he was whipped from behind. There are so many scourge marks on the back of the man that they are easily the dominant feature of the dorsal image.

Shoulder Injuries

Two broad excoriated areas are present across the victim’s shoulder blades (fig.12). These scrapes are consistent with surface abrasions caused by contact between skin and a heavy rough object.14 Because some of the scourge marks within this area are slightly different when compared to the clearly defined marks elsewhere on the body,15 the scourging must have preceded the shoulder abrasions. We know that many crucifixion victims were forced to carry their own crossbars to the execution site. Carrying such a large chunk of wood could easily have caused some of the man’s shoulder wounds, especially if he fell under the weight of the beam and was struck by the wood falling on top of him. The Shroud contains evidence consistent with such a fall or falls. Scratches, lesions, and abrasions on the front of the man’s knees have been revealed by white light photos (see fig. 17)16 and by ultraviolet fluorescent lighting.17 Microscopic examination of the Shroud image also discloses particles of dirt on the front of the knees, nose, and bottom of the feet.18 Being struck with the crossbeam during a fall may also explain some of the wounds on the back of the man’s head.
Some pathologists have identified another injury on the man thaw may or may not be postmortem. As he appears on the Shroud, the man’s arms have been forcibly bent so his hands cover his groin. To accomplish this, the shoulder girdle would have had to be broken or dislocated, a practice common to morticians when positioning a body for burial.19 In this procedure, the muscles between the neck and shoulder are massaged to release rigor mortis so the arms can be moved. Some medical investigators have noticed that the man’s right shoulder is about 5 degrees lower than the left, a feature most apparent on the dorsal view.20 Dr. Pierre Barbet believes this indicates a dislocated shoulder, which may have occurred either during hand positioning at burial, when the victim fell, or when he was raising and lowering himself on the cross.21 If the man’s shoulder had been dislocated while he was still alive, that injury would have been another source of intense pain.

Leg and Foot Wounds

Detailed study of the lower extremities reveals two large blood marks on the front of the feet, the larger of which has a surrounding border that fluoresces under ultraviolet light.22
On the dorsal image, two bloodstained imprints of the feet are evident, with the right foot impression being more complete and showing the outline from heel to toes (fig. 18). Some blood has flowed off the right heel area and onto the cloth. Medical experts agree that this large amount of blood resulted from a piercing wound to the foot23 and Dr. Robert Bucklin has identified the source of the blood flow: “a square image surrounded by a pale hole” in the metatarsal zone.24 From this wound, some blood runs vertically toward the toes, but most flows toward the heels and horizontally onto the cloth.25 this tells us the man was bleeding while in different positions—vertically while on the cross and horizontally when being carried after he was dead. The blood flow running toward the heels and onto the cloth, deeper in color, has been identified as post mortem.26 The most likely explanation for this postmortem bloodstain is that most of the blood that accumulated in the front and lower part of the foot while in the vertical position flowed from the wound after the piercing instrument was removed and the body was laid flat. The Shroud’s medical examiners have concluded that this piercing instrument must have been the nail or spike typically used for crucifixion. Since this foot wound (shown in fig. 19) is surrounded by the metatarsal bones, a large nail would provide the support necessary to prop up the victim’s weight.
When viewing the back of the man’s legs and feet, we see that the left foot and leg images are less defined than the right ones. In addition, the left heel is elevated above the right. These facts indicate that the left knee was flexed to some degree. While this is most apparent on the dorsal view, the left leg visible on the frontal image also appears slightly raised. In light of these findings, most pathologists contend that the right foot was placed directly against a flat surface, while the left leg was bent at the knee and the left foot rotated to rest on top of the right foot. With a body in this position, a single nail driven between the metatarsal bones could affix both feet in a stationary position.

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 05:41 PM
If i was alive during the time jesus was around i would have tortued him to death/ cause iam tired of these religious people

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in