Baidarka

On an Art Critique site I've gotten into a discussion about a depiction of the crucifixion.

http://artcritiquegallery.com/dcforu...ID1/6165.html#

The Artist placed the nails in the forearms.

I wrote- "In the doubting Thomas incident we are explicitly told that the risen rabbi had holes in his palms. I realize that you have placed the nails into the arms to harmonize with current thinking but by doing so you have contradicted the myth which was designed to harmonize with supposed Scriptural Prophesy. Are you more interested in Historical truth or mythological fidelity?"

To which another Poster whose pseudonym is Insura wrote " "In the doubting Thomas incident we are explicitly told that the risen rabbi had holes in his palms." The translation was off.. due to the inability to come up with an appropriate word. Doctors, Scholars and theologians of today have gone back to that scripture and found compelling evidence that the nails could not be in the palms... since the palms do not medically have the tendons/ muscle to withstand the gravity of a man. The spikes would have torn his hands off. It was instead pierced in the junction between the palm and forearm and yet still we don't have an accurate name for that region."

My question here is there any reading of the Doubting Thomas incident that can be read as consistent with nails placed anywhere besides the area that we call the palm?

Of course if the nails were placed as Insura suggests then bones would have been broken which would contradict the NT text.

Dean Anderson

Erm... not wishing to appear a smartass here, but isn't the region between the palm and the forearm called the "wrist".

That seems an accurate enough name to me...

Baidarka

Pervy -

Of course you are right but please note that it was Insura, not Baidarka who wrote "It was instead pierced in the junction between the palm and forearm and yet still we don't have an accurate name for that region."
My question is could there have been a mistranslation which has caused confusion between wrist and palm?

Also since a spike through the wrist would of course break bones would this not cause a problem, since the NT insists that no bones were broken.

Evil Sentient Duck

This apologetic has always struck me as a "ahh, yeah! that's what it meant all along-- Yeah, see the bible's still right." :huh:

Ask Insura for the compelling evidence and the correct exegesis that s/he was referring to. One thing's for sure, theologians argue over Greek all the time. If you want to make a new doctrine, go to the Greek and "Greek it" into existence.

Chili

All the senses were pierced to show victory over desire (beyond desire) and has nothing to do with pounding nails.

The hands, the feet, the brow, the lips and also the 'cavity' next to the heart was pierced to show that only the sin nature was crucified.

My critique would be that the artist forgot to pierce the heart from the right side to bring about this relief.

Boro Nut

Calling all Christians!! Urgent!!!

If you have any suggestions for a word which accurately describes the wrist, can you send them immediately on a postcard marked Wrist Name Appeal to the Vatican Crisis Management Centre.

Boro Nut

Edited to admit how hopelessly late I was with this one.

Boro Nut

That’s completely right. Apart form the eyes and ears and tongue and nose piercing bit. That was Punks and Goths, not Christs and Messiahs. An easy mistake to make under the circumstances. The circumstance being that it was you who wrote it.

Boro Nut

Amaleq13

According to Young's Literal Translation, Mark 7:3 includes a word that means "wrist":

"for the Pharisees, and all the Jews, if they do not wash the hands to the wrist, do not eat, holding the tradition of the elders,"

Phishfood

depends where the nail was. 'wrist' isn't an explicit anatomical term. im no bible expert so ill take your word on "somewhere between the palm and forearm" and given that, it would depend where it was. between the carpals or at the radioulnar joint would definitely break bones. but just a little more medial (further up the forearm) you'd be between the radius and ulna and not break any bones. where your wrist flexes is actually where the radius and ulna meet the first row of carpals, and the rest of your carpals are actually more up in your palm. so if its at where you can bend your hand, yah you'd break bones. just a bit further up though and you wouldnt.

just a little FYI
-Pf

Boro Nut

Careful with that ruddy mallet Lucius you clumsy git. You'll break some poor sod's bone one of these days.

Sorry Marcus. I've not nailed a king down before. These anointed ones is a bit slippy.

Yeah well, just pay attention. And knock one in his knob when you’re done lad. Wipe that bloody smug halo off his face. Vinegar indeed. I've won prizes with that goosegog wine I'll have you know.

Boro Nut