Medical Description of the Flogging and Crucifixion of Jesus

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 29 2004 @ 10:15 PM
link   
For those who wonder.......and now you know, He did it for you! Yes, ALL of you...........




Medical Description of the Flogging and Crucifixion of Jesus

The following is excerpted from The Expositors Bible Commentary (Volume 8, pages 775-780, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984.)



(Commenting on Mark 15:15) The Romans first stripped the victim and tied his hands to a post above his head. The whip (flagellum) was made of several pieces of leather with pieces of bone and lead embedded near the ends. Two men, one on each side of the victim, usually did the flogging. The Jews mercifully limited flogging to a maximum of forty stripes; the Romans had no such limitation. The following is a medical doctors description of the physical effects of flogging.

The heavy whip is brought down with full force again and again across Jesus shoulders, back, and legs. At first the heavy thongs cut through the skin only. Then, as the blows continue, they cut deeper in the subcutaneous tissues, producing first and oozing of blood from the capillaries and veins of the skin, and finally spurting arterial bleeding from vessels in the underlying muscles Finally the skin of the back is hanging in long ribbons and the entire area is an unrecognizable mass of torn, bleeding tissue. (C. Truman Davis, "The Crucifixion of Jesus. The Passion of Christ from a Medical Point of View," Arizona Medicine 22, no. 3 [March 1965]: 185)

It is not surprising that victims of Roman floggings seldom survived.

(Commenting on Mark 15:17-18) The crown was made of some kind of prickly plant such as abounds in Palestine. This they pressed into his scalp. Again there must have been copious bleeding because the scalp is one of the most vascular areas of the body.

(Commenting on Mark 15:19) The mocking was followed by further physical violence. The blows hitting his head from the staff drove the thorns more deeply into Jesus scalp and caused even more profuse bleeding. They also kept spitting on him

(Commenting on Mark 15:20) At last tiring of their sadism, the soldiers tore the robe from Jesus back. The fabric had probably stuck to the clots of blood and serum in the wounds. Thus when it was callously ripped off him, it caused excruciating pain, just as when a bandage is carelessly removed. Jesus own clothes were now put back on him.

(Commenting on Mark 15:21) Men condemned to die by crucifixion were customarily required to carry the heavy wooden crosspiece (patibulum) on which they were to be nailed, to the place of execution. Jesus started out carrying his cross (John 19:17), but it proved to be too much for him. The patibulum usually weighed thirty or forty pounds and was usually strapped across the shoulders. One can hardly imagine the pain caused by the rough heavy beam pressing into the lacerated skin and muscles of Jesus shoulders. The scourging of blood so weakened him that he could not go on carrying the heavy crossbeam.

(Commenting on Mark 15:24) Mark simply says, "And they crucified him." What incredible restraint! Especially when one considers that crucifixion was, as Cicero said, "the cruelest and most hideous punishment possible" (In Verrem 5.54.165). What took place physically is described by Davis ("Crucifixion of Jesus," pp. 186-187).

Simon is ordered to place the patibulum on the ground and Jesus is quickly thrown backwards with his shoulders against the wood. The legionnaire feels for the depression at the front of the wrist. He drives a heavy, square, wrought-iron nail through the wrist and deep into the wood. Quickly he moves to the other side and repeats the action, being careful not to pull the arms too tightly, but to allow some flexion and movement. The cross is then lifted into place.

The left foot is pressed backward against the right foot, and with both feet extended, toes down, a nail is driven through the arch of each, leaving the knees moderately flexed. The victim is now crucified. As he slowly sags down with more weight on the nails in the wrists, excruciating, fiery pain shoots along the fingers and up the arms to explode in brainthe nails in the wrists are putting pressure on the median nerves. As he pushes himself upward to avoid this stretching torment, he places the full weight on the nail through his feet. Again he feels the searing agony of the nail tearing through the nerves between the metatarsal bones of the feet.

At this point, another phenomenon occurs. As the arms fatigue, cramps sweep through the muscles, knotting them in deep, relentless, throbbing pain. With these cramps comes the inability to push himself upward to breathe. . . . Air can be drawn into the lungs but not exhaled. Jesus fights to raise himself in order to get even one small breath. Finally carbon dioxide builds up in the lungs and in the blood stream, and the cramps partially subside. Spasmodically he is able to push himself upward to exhale and bring in life-giving oxygen.



Hours of this limitless pain, cycles of twisting, joint-rending cramps, intermittent partial asphyxiation, searing pain as tissue is torn from his lacerated back as he moves up and down against the rough timber. Then another agony begins a deep, crushing pain deep in the chest as the pericardium slowly fills with serum and begins to compress the heart.



It is now almost overthe loss of tissue fluids reached a critical levelthe compressed heart is struggling to pump heavy, thick, sluggish blood into the tissuesthe tortured lungs are making a frantic effort to gasp in small gulps of air. . . . The body of Jesus is now in extremis, and He can feel the chill of death creeping through his tissues . . . . His mission of atonement has been completed. Finally he can allow His body to die.



All this, the Bible records with the simple words, "And they crucified him" (Mark 15:24).




posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 06:56 AM
link   
Apparently crucifixion is still practised in some eastern countries? I don't think I could possibly imagine a more sadistic, disgusting act of violence even if I tried. The crucifixion as taught in most relgions is soooooo watered down and all flowers and honey. Watching the passion of christ gave me a real thump back into reality and as to how horrible the event would have been.

Seriously, if I were an omnipotent being, and my only "son" had just been tortured, maimed and killed in this manner, I'd be throwing lightning bolts left right and center
In my opinion people who committed (commit?) these acts, ESPECIALLY those who enjoy it have something wrong in the head and don't deserve to be on this planet....If i ever become omnipotent may the me have mercy on the poor fool who gets on my wrong side



posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Well its Lent time and this should be read by those that believe that your sins were paid for in this manner.....


For God so loved the world.....................



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Its that time of year again...Thought I would re-share this as it is relevant to the times at hand.

Good time to watch the Passion of the Christ also, it might not be 100% accurate, but it does give an idea of what the Christ went through for all mankind.



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Here is a *stark* image of the ugly truth!

Nails through your bones!!!! Can you imagine? Have you imagined? EGAD.

Jesus was actually more fortunate than the majority; it would seem that 6 or 9 hours of such unspeakable torture was just a fraction of the usual amount of time victims spent hanging and dying. I think I have read that 2 or 3 days was the norm rather than the exception.

A person would be absolutely driven mad by the time release from the body came!



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Ed,

I have the book, "A Doctor at Calvary" The passion of our Lord Jesus Christ as Described by a Surgeon.

Author: Pierre Barbet, M.D.

I have been rereading this book for many years during Holy Week. His description is really close to what you have posted above. This year I also have the DVD of The Passion of the Christ.

It is good for me to remember just what the cost was for the mercy of the forgiveness of my sins. I imagine that the agony in the Garden where he took on the sins of the world and my sins was much more painful though.



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 02:41 PM
link   
jesus wasn't the only messiah to die for your sins at the time, i hope you all realize that

and you should also acknowledge the sacrafice of dionysus for your sins
and that of horus



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
jesus wasn't the only messiah to die for your sins at the time, i hope you all realize that
and you should also acknowledge the sacrafice of dionysus for your sins
and that of horus


And to think that thousands saw those two after they rose from the dead also...wink wink.



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
jesus wasn't the only messiah to die for your sins at the time, i hope you all realize that


EVEN more significant, IMO, is the fact that Jesus wasn't the only innocent person sentenced to capital punishment in this exceedingly CRUEL and INHUMANE fashion...

What is more important? YOUR sins or your neighbor's human rights being taken from him for sins he DID NOT commit?

I think that there is a FAR greater lesson to be learned in this...

...repeated again, almost certainly, in the case of Bruno Hauptmann and the unproven accusation against him which cost him his life - also after only ONE year of being married - not to mention the fact that Bruno was a carpenter, too - JUST LIKE Jesus!!!

Hmmm....if Jesus being executed for basically NOTHING earns Christians a free ride to 'heaven' then what does Bruno Hauptmann's score for mankind?



Another interesting 'coincidence'
is that Hauptmann was executed on April 3, 1936. That year, Pesach (Passover) was on April 7, with the Fast of the Firstborn being the 6th - 3 days after Hauptmann's trip to 'Old Smokey.'

From Famous Trials:


Journalist H. L. Mencken called the trial of Richard "Bruno" Hauptmann, the accused kidnapper of the baby of aviator Charles Lindbergh, "the greatest story since the Resurrection." While Mencken's description is doubtless an exaggeration, measured by the public interest it generated, the Hauptmann trial stands with the O. J. Simpson and Scopes trials as among the most famous trials of the 20th century.


Also, from a link on that same site, two handwritten sentiments directly from Bruno Hauptmann:

Last Letter to Gov. Harold G. Hoffman (March 31, 1936)



Your Excellence:
My writing is not for fear of losing my life, this is in the hands of God, it is His will. I will go gladly, it means the end of my tremendous suffering. Only in thinking of my wife and my little boy, that is breaking my heart. I know until this terrible crime is solvet, they will have to suffer unter the weight of my unfair conviction.
I beg you, Attorney General, believe at least a dying man. Please investigate, because the case is not solvet, it only adds another death to the Lindbergh case.
I thank your Excellence, from the bottom of my heart, and may God bless you,
Respectfully,
Bruno Richard Hauptmann


May God bless you, he says! I see a saintly soul with a pure heart! Here are his official last words:

Last Statement (April 3, 1936)


I am glad that my life in a world which has not understood me has ended. Soon I will be at home with my Lord, so I am dying an innocent man. Should, however, my death serve for the purpose of abolishing capital punishment—such a punishment being arrived at only by circumstantial evidence—I feel that my death has not been in vain. I am at peace with God. I repeat, I protest my innocence of the crime for which I was convicted. However, I die with no malice or hatred in my heart. The love of Christ has filled my soul and I am happy in Him.


It is obvious that Christ had a profound effect on this man's soul - truly I would say that Christ DID save Bruno Hauptmann!

BUT NOT in death - neither the life of Jesus or Bruno - but in LIFE - the life of Christ that Bruno believed to be true and which he modeled himself after as best he could! And so, when the world had it's wicked way with another innocent man, Bruno was lifted up in his spirit and so did not die with a grudge, spite, hate, or even shattered feelings....

One man's death (even one who has realized unity with the FATHER) can NEVER 'pay' for 'sins' the rest of the population might be guilty of later on...and there is a very real possibility that we might have to pay the debt of another's guilt, too! ANY of us! And yet, when we see God - we have no reason to fear or feel accused - not because Jesus died falsely accused but because He lived without fear, shame, or any other shade of carnal obsessions that we put upon ourselves and eachother!

It is about:
LOVE
GRACE
FREEDOM
&
LIFE!

It doesn't matter what any of us do - as far as God is concerned! We MUST certainly treat one another as we would treat our own kin (for we are kin) but beyond that, we have no restrictions or condemnation other than what WE apply! That is the message of Easter/Passover/Vernal Equinox!
Renewed life which is hope not DOOM and JUDGMENT.

Christians will no doubt try to tear my statements to shreds, but my sword is quite sharp and ALL I say was revealed to me through the Spirit from the pages of the Bible - and although I have no need of dying for anyone's hang-ups, my mission is no different than that of He who sent me - and the goal is the same as it ever was.

Seek ye FIRST the kingdom of God...and HIS righteousness AND also learn what this means: I will have mercy, and not sacrifice

Happy Regeneration, my friends! The manifestation of the sons of God is finally come at last! - if we would but be willing to see God's Glory amongst ourselves in eachother!
Unless you allow it, and see it, in your own soul , you cannot discern it in the soul of your brethren.



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
And to think that thousands saw those two after they rose from the dead also...wink wink.


i'm not sure about thousands. but if thousands claimed to have seen jesus rise from the dead, WHY DIDN'T THEY WRITE SOMETHING DOWN! or at least find someone to write it down for them if they were illiterate. that's the type of thing you see and say "i'm writing down the exact date that this happened." hell, i've recorded much less extraordinary experiences.



posted on Apr, 2 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mahree
I have the book, "A Doctor at Calvary" The passion of our Lord Jesus Christ as Described by a Surgeon.


I have read that. It is amazing and it stays with you for a very long time. Prayer and meditation after reading that are never the same! I highly recommend the book.



posted on Apr, 2 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysouli'm not sure about thousands. but if thousands claimed to have seen jesus rise from the dead, WHY DIDN'T THEY WRITE SOMETHING DOWN!


Uh Some did - John and Matthew that guy named Paul

Others wrote down first hand accounts Luke etc...

Maybe there are some earlier writings that we have yet to find, who knows.

Its amazing that so many were willing to die without having actually SEEN him.



posted on Apr, 2 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Uh Some did - John and Matthew that guy named Paul

Others wrote down first hand accounts Luke etc...

Maybe there are some earlier writings that we have yet to find, who knows.


the consensus in the field of biblical history says that the matthew through john were written around the third century. did luke live to be over 300 years old?

ohh, maybe there are earlier accounts...
maybe they're with the unicorn horns



Its amazing that so many were willing to die without having actually SEEN him.


it's not really that surprising, people died for the cult of dionysus too
they just didn't survive as a group because no emperors declared that the dionysian cult was the official religion of their empire.



posted on Apr, 2 2007 @ 09:07 PM
link   

the consensus in the field of biblical history says that the matthew through john were written around the third century.




You're claiming that the Gospels were written in the 3rd century, and also claim that that's the scholary consensus, correct? Got a (scholarly) source?



Wikipedia: Date of Composition

Some other modern critical scholars concur with the dating of the majority of the New Testament, except for the epistles and books that they consider to be pseudepigraphical (i.e., those thought not to be written by their traditional authors). Some do not. For the Gospels they tend to date Mark no earlier than 65, and Matthew some time between 70 and 85. Luke is usually placed in the 80 to 95 time frame. The earliest of the books of the New Testament was First Thessalonians, an epistle of Paul, written probably in 51, or possibly Galatians in 49 according to one of two theories of its writing. Of the pseudepigraphical epistles, Christian scholars tend to place them somewhere between 70 and 150, with Second Peter usually being the latest.


In the 1830s German scholars of the Tübingen school dated the books as late as the third century, but the discovery of some New Testament manuscripts and fragments, not including some of the later writings, dating as far back as 125 (notably Papyrus 52) has called such late dating into question. Additionally, a letter to the church at Corinth in the name of Clement of Rome in 95 quotes from 10 of the 27 books of the New Testament, and a letter to the church at Philippi in the name of Polycarp in 120 quotes from 16 books.



Wikipedia: Papyrus 52 (Fragment of the Gospel of John 18:31-33. Generally agreed to be from the 1st century [dated to c125AD])

Remember this is only the oldest known copy, the original is - obviously - older. I only mention the obvious because it seems to have escaped you.

"This manuscript (P52) has generally been dated to ca. A.D. 125. This fact alone proved that the original Gospel of John was written earlier, viz. in the first century A.D., as had always been upheld by conservative scholars."[Source]

So I'd be interested in a link that claims the modern scholarly consensus is that the Gospels were written in the 3rd century.



posted on Apr, 3 2007 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Rren, i'll get back to you sometime before friday. at the moment i'm just cruising to clear my mind between writing papers at midnight and i'm still swamped with work that i didn't do during spring break. i'll get you the and i meant the second century not the third.... oops, my bad. i'm a bit frazzled right now.

send me a U2U if i neglect this duty



posted on Apr, 3 2007 @ 03:44 PM
link   
3rd?

Someone already took care of that one....

Yes FIRSTHAND witnesses to it, most were martyred for their belief also.

I tend to think that the Gospels and the Letters of Paul were all written BEFORE 100AD. As was pointed out, these were probably copies, so the originals had to be older yet.



posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
3rd?

Someone already took care of that one....

Yes FIRSTHAND witnesses to it, most were martyred for their belief also.

I tend to think that the Gospels and the Letters of Paul were all written BEFORE 100AD. As was pointed out, these were probably copies, so the originals had to be older yet.


just popping in, not enough time to do my serious research or put up a post that hits the character limit.

paul wasn't a contemporary of jesus by PAUL'S account.

also, nowhere does paul claim jesus to be a historical figure



posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
also, nowhere does paul claim jesus to be a historical figure


Your kidding right? He persecuted the followers of a non-historical figure??



posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Madness, here are a couple good sources that shows the dates of the Biblical manuscripts we have to date.

www.geocities.com...
en.wikipedia.org...
www.religionfacts.com...

I was a Christian Ministry / Youth Ministry double major in college and lots of my study focussed on the Aramaic / Greek texts of the NT. It is amazing how the poetry and structure of the original Greek language used by the Biblical writers is so beautiful and inspiring. Until you see an entire book written in chiastic structure from the original Greek language you can't comprehend the beauty of the Bible. So many people just throw it out as being gibberish when there is something unbelievably beautiful and complex there that so many people are missing. It's so hard to describe scripture's beauty from the original Greek but there are some chiastic structures that run through the entire book in an: A B C D E D C B A type structure that is so powerful to behold.

Here is an example of a chiasm that I just quickly found that doesn't even do some of the beautiful Biblical structural relationships justice.

www.greaterthings.com...

There may be more manuscripts out there. The dead sea scrolls were found between 1947 and 1956 (this is extremely recently considering dead sea scroll texts date to before 100AD) so there may very well be some original manuscripts still waiting to be found. Also there was a major library that burned long ago (i can't remember which library it was.....maybe the Antiochous or Alexandria library?) that was theorized to house many ancient texts including Biblical manuscripts.

Honestly, the Biblical manuscript base is suprisingly intact. Nearly the entire New Testament is found in manuscript form dating before 300AD. It is also amazing how close each manuscript is to each other in written form. There is virtually no change from manuscripts of the Gospels found in 50-80AD to Gospel manuscripts found from 100-200AD. This shows that the story stayed the same over time. It did not change like the game of telephone.

Don't believe all the huff and puff you hear from critics. Biblical translators have a very powerful manuscript source from which to translate.

Thank you so much for your post on this subject. It is truly a beautiful thing for me to read and behold no matter how many times I've heard this medical account.

P.S. On Paul:
www.biblegateway.com...:1-19

Paul most definately persecuted the followers of Jesus and acknowleges Jesus throughout his accounts and letters. Jesus is the basis (the foundation if you will) of all of Paul's writings.

[edit on 6-4-2007 by Bugman82]



posted on Apr, 6 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
also, nowhere does paul claim jesus to be a historical figure


Your kidding right? He persecuted the followers of a non-historical figure??


...

yes, obviously it was a different time. religions didn't claim to be based on historical figures in that region. did the christians not persecute the followers of pagan gods?

i love how, instead of trying to cite a single passage in which jesus is claimed to be historical by paul like a reasonable person would you ask a skewed question





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join