How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
-
- Advanced Senior Member
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am
How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken when nails were driven into His hands(wrists) and feet?
John 19:36, These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken,"
Thanks you.
John 19:36, These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken,"
Thanks you.
-
- Board Moderator
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
-
- Advanced Senior Member
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
Thank you.PaulSacramento wrote:The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
Besides which, how else would the prophecies have been fulfilled (Exodus 12:46, Psalms 34:20)? The Passover lamb must be unblemished, with no broken bones. Jesus is the perfect Passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29).PaulSacramento wrote:The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
Let us proclaim the mystery of our faith: Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.
Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
-
- Advanced Senior Member
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
There is that and I believe God is perfectly capable of seeing that no bone was broken.Byblos wrote:Besides which, how else would the prophecies have been fulfilled (Exodus 12:46, Psalms 34:20)? The Passover lamb must be unblemished, with no broken bones. Jesus is the perfect Passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29).PaulSacramento wrote:The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
And, one has to wonder if the Romans put a nail through one of the bones in the victim's feet, how the damaged foot could have provided enough support to keep the victim on the cross. Seems to me the bone would have fractured or broken into pieces to the extent that the victim would no longer be able to push up to breath and would have died within a very short time and victims sometimes hung on the cross for days.
-
- Board Moderator
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
Of course, but I thought you were asking a non-theological question.Christian2 wrote:There is that and I believe God is perfectly capable of seeing that no bone was broken.Byblos wrote:Besides which, how else would the prophecies have been fulfilled (Exodus 12:46, Psalms 34:20)? The Passover lamb must be unblemished, with no broken bones. Jesus is the perfect Passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29).PaulSacramento wrote:The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
And, one has to wonder if the Romans put a nail through one of the bones in the victim's feet, how the damaged foot could have provided enough support to keep the victim on the cross. Seems to me the bone would have fractured or broken into pieces to the extent that the victim would no longer be able to push up to breath and would have died within a very short time and victims sometimes hung on the cross for days.
RE the foot thing:
It was done in a few different ways supposedly and in some cases there was even a little "seat" so that the person could survive even longer.
Crucifixion was a torture death and people were supposed to last for days.
-
- Advanced Senior Member
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
The Romans would break legs in order to hurry death. Wouldn't braking the bones in the ankle have had the same effect?PaulSacramento wrote:Of course, but I thought you were asking a non-theological question.Christian2 wrote:There is that and I believe God is perfectly capable of seeing that no bone was broken.Byblos wrote:Besides which, how else would the prophecies have been fulfilled (Exodus 12:46, Psalms 34:20)? The Passover lamb must be unblemished, with no broken bones. Jesus is the perfect Passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29).PaulSacramento wrote:The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
And, one has to wonder if the Romans put a nail through one of the bones in the victim's feet, how the damaged foot could have provided enough support to keep the victim on the cross. Seems to me the bone would have fractured or broken into pieces to the extent that the victim would no longer be able to push up to breath and would have died within a very short time and victims sometimes hung on the cross for days.
RE the foot thing:
It was done in a few different ways supposedly and in some cases there was even a little "seat" so that the person could survive even longer.
Crucifixion was a torture death and people were supposed to last for days.
-
- Board Moderator
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
Nope, the shins were the bones broken for quicken death.Christian2 wrote:The Romans would break legs in order to hurry death. Wouldn't braking the bones in the ankle have had the same effect?PaulSacramento wrote:Of course, but I thought you were asking a non-theological question.Christian2 wrote:There is that and I believe God is perfectly capable of seeing that no bone was broken.Byblos wrote:Besides which, how else would the prophecies have been fulfilled (Exodus 12:46, Psalms 34:20)? The Passover lamb must be unblemished, with no broken bones. Jesus is the perfect Passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29).PaulSacramento wrote:The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
And, one has to wonder if the Romans put a nail through one of the bones in the victim's feet, how the damaged foot could have provided enough support to keep the victim on the cross. Seems to me the bone would have fractured or broken into pieces to the extent that the victim would no longer be able to push up to breath and would have died within a very short time and victims sometimes hung on the cross for days.
RE the foot thing:
It was done in a few different ways supposedly and in some cases there was even a little "seat" so that the person could survive even longer.
Crucifixion was a torture death and people were supposed to last for days.
-
- Advanced Senior Member
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
I know that. My point is that putting a nail through the bone in the ankle might have the same effect -- shattering the bone so that it would break by pushing up to breathe.PaulSacramento wrote: Nope, the shins were the bones broken for quicken death.
-
- Newbie Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:30 am
- Christian: Yes
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
How do we know that none of his bones weren't broken?
-
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 3502
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
- Christian: No
- Sex: Female
- Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
- Location: USA
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
Christian2 wrote:There is that and I believe God is perfectly capable of seeing that no bone was broken.Byblos wrote:Besides which, how else would the prophecies have been fulfilled (Exodus 12:46, Psalms 34:20)? The Passover lamb must be unblemished, with no broken bones. Jesus is the perfect Passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29).PaulSacramento wrote:The Romans were very good at what they did, killing people and/or making them suffer.
The driving of the nails into the hands/wrists and feet would have been done in-between the bones so as to use the bones as "anchor points".
And, one has to wonder if the Romans put a nail through one of the bones in the victim's feet, how the damaged foot could have provided enough support to keep the victim on the cross. Seems to me the bone would have fractured or broken into pieces to the extent that the victim would no longer be able to push up to breath and would have died within a very short time and victims sometimes hung on the cross for days.
Wasnt the purpose and custom to make it as bad as possible, and then leave the corpse there as a display?
- Jac3510
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 5472
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:53 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
- Location: Fort Smith, AR
- Contact:
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
Yes, that was the purpose -- torture and humiliation, which was to serve as a deterrent to anyone who would dare question or challenge the authority of Rome.
edit:
As an interesting (to me) aside, we say things like I just did above rather flippantly given how common knowledge such is. But sometimes I think we miss as a result of that just how deep that "principle" went in Rome (at least, during certain points in its history). It's easy to equate this notion with crucifixion, but it was bigger than that. For just one example, look up the practice of decimation. At least the death penalty exists in some nations today, and so the crucifixion is only considered barbaric insofar as it was torture. It wasn't a humane way to put people to death. So it's shocking, but only because of the torturesque aspect. But decimation . . . can you imagine a military unit doing that today? Sheesh. Should give you a taste as just how barbaric that society really was, or at least, how barbaric it could be. Take that understanding to the crucifixion, and I think you get a whole new appreciation for the cruelty it embodied.
edit:
As an interesting (to me) aside, we say things like I just did above rather flippantly given how common knowledge such is. But sometimes I think we miss as a result of that just how deep that "principle" went in Rome (at least, during certain points in its history). It's easy to equate this notion with crucifixion, but it was bigger than that. For just one example, look up the practice of decimation. At least the death penalty exists in some nations today, and so the crucifixion is only considered barbaric insofar as it was torture. It wasn't a humane way to put people to death. So it's shocking, but only because of the torturesque aspect. But decimation . . . can you imagine a military unit doing that today? Sheesh. Should give you a taste as just how barbaric that society really was, or at least, how barbaric it could be. Take that understanding to the crucifixion, and I think you get a whole new appreciation for the cruelty it embodied.
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
-
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 3502
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
- Christian: No
- Sex: Female
- Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
- Location: USA
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
What of morality if (since) ice cream makes me ill?
Last edited by Audie on Sat Aug 06, 2016 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Jac3510
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 5472
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:53 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
- Location: Fort Smith, AR
- Contact:
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
Does not compute.
I've been reading bylaws and constitutions all day.
I've been reading bylaws and constitutions all day.
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
- JButler
- Established Member
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2016 10:36 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Undecided
Re: How is it possible that none of Jesus' bones were broken
I've been studying the Roman Empire's history more in-depth after learning of my ancestor's probable involvement with the Praetorian Guard and cavalry units for the legions. The Romans were a real Jekyll and Hyde bunch, building incredible structures on one hand but using that same ingenuity to torture and kill people. They took delight with experimenting with different ways to extend the suffering of those to be killed. In some areas they had hundreds of crosses alongside roads with the corpses left on them after death for the deterrent factor.
The Romans are as repulsive as they are fascinating.
The Romans are as repulsive as they are fascinating.
If the truth hurts, maybe it should.