spin

Nevertheless, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands..." (Jn 20:25)


spin

spamandham

If nails were not used in the hands, why would the author of John place that there?

spin

Either to garner the sympathy vote for Jesus or to try to get free anatomy lessons.


spin

Notsri

The gospel of John is not unique in this regard, though. In his Civil War, e.g., Lucan speaks of "iron driven into hands" in the context of a crucifixion (6.547). Similarly in Plautus' play, The Haunted House: "I'll give two hundred pounds to the first man to charge my cross and take it—on condition his legs and arms are double-nailed, that is" (2.1.360). Of course, in terms of Jesus' crucifixion in particular, the gospel of Luke apparently agrees on this point with the gospel of John; the risen Jesus says of his wounds: "See my hands and my feet" (24:39).

semiopen

FWIW, shroud sluts claim the shroud shows nails in the wrist, the advantage of this being that the body can actually be supported this way.

Probably the artist had to crucify someone to figure this out. The joke may be on him though, since they might have used ropes on the arms and just driven nails into the hands for aesthetic reasons.

spin

Plautus is correct. The best one can say about Lucan is that it is "poetic", because obviously it wasn't hands.


spin

jgreen44

But, hanging and nailing being different activities, Acts appears to disagree.

Acts 5:30
The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead—whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree.

Acts 10:39
"We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a tree,

Acts 13:29
When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb.

Galatians 3:13
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."

Notsri

Since the author of Acts sometimes speaks of a crucifixion it seems best to me to assume the hanging mentioned elsewhere in a few instances refers to crucifixion as well; presumably the language has just been colored by Deuteronomy 21:22-3, as is obviously the case with Galatians 3:13, where a portion of that passage is explicitly cited.

Incidentally, the association of this text from Deuteronomy with the act crucifixion is apparently not unique to Christian thinking; several Jewish texts have been similarly interpreted by modern exegetes. For instance, the so-called Temple Scroll from Qumran (11Q19 64.7-12):

If a man passes on information against his people or betrays his people to a foreign nation, or does evil against his people, you shall hang him on a tree [i.e., crucify him] and he will die… And their corpse shall not spend the night on the tree; instead you shall bury them that day because [according to Deut 21:2-3,] those hanged on a tree are cursed by God and man; thus you shall not defile the land which I give you for inheritance.

Also, Sifre Deuteronomy §221:

Rabbi Eliezer says: Just as the blasphemer is characterized by being liable to stoning, and then to hanging, so also all who are liable to stoning should then be hanged. One might think that he is to be hanged alive [i.e., crucified], as is the practice of the [Roman] government; therefore the verse states: "And he is put to death [first], and [then] you hang him on a tree" [Deut 21:22].