RE: Crucifixion question
April 15, 2019 at 1:48 pm
(This post was last modified: April 15, 2019 at 2:25 pm by Bucky Ball.)
"Crucifixion was most often performed to dissuade its witnesses from perpetrating similar (usually particularly heinous) crimes. Victims were sometimes left on display after death as a warning to any other potential criminals. Crucifixion was usually intended to provide a death that was particularly slow, painful (hence the term excruciating, literally "out of crucifying"), gruesome, humiliating, and public, using whatever means were most expedient for that goal. Crucifixion methods varied considerably with location and time period.
The Greek and Latin words corresponding to "crucifixion" applied to many different forms of painful execution, including being impaled on a stake, or affixed to a tree, upright pole (a crux simplex), or (most famous now) to a combination of an upright (in Latin, stipes) and a crossbeam (in Latin, patibulum). Seneca the Younger wrote: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet".[14]
In some cases, the condemned was forced to carry the crossbeam to the place of execution.[15] A whole cross would weigh well over 135 kg (300 lb), but the crossbeam would not be as burdensome, weighing around 45 kg (100 lb).[16] The Roman historian Tacitus records that the city of Rome had a specific place for carrying out executions, situated outside the Esquiline Gate,[17] and had a specific area reserved for the execution of slaves by crucifixion.[18] Upright posts would presumably be fixed permanently in that place, and the crossbeam, with the condemned person perhaps already nailed to it, would then be attached to the post.
The person executed may have been attached to the cross by rope, though nails and other sharp materials are mentioned in a passage by the Judean historian Josephus, where he states that at the Siege of Jerusalem (70), "the soldiers out of rage and hatred, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest".[19] Objects used in the crucifixion of criminals, such as nails, were sought as amulets with perceived medicinal qualities.[20]
While a crucifixion was an execution, it was also a humiliation, by making the condemned as vulnerable as possible. Although artists have traditionally depicted the figure on a cross with a loin cloth or a covering of the genitals, the person being crucified was usually stripped naked. Writings by Seneca the Younger state some victims suffered a stick forced upwards through their groin.[21][22] Despite its frequent use by the Romans, the horrors of crucifixion did not escape criticism by some eminent Roman orators. Cicero, for example, described crucifixion as "a most cruel and disgusting punishment",[23] and suggested that "the very mention of the cross should be far removed not only from a Roman citizen's body, but from his mind, his eyes, his ears".[24] Elsewhere he says, "It is a crime to bind a Roman citizen; to scourge him is a wickedness; to put him to death is almost parricide. What shall I say of crucifying him? So guilty an action cannot by any possibility be adequately expressed by any name bad enough for it."[25]
Frequently, the legs of the person executed were broken or shattered with an iron club, an act called crurifragium, which was also frequently applied without crucifixion to slaves.[26] This act hastened the death of the person but was also meant to deter those who observed the crucifixion from committing offenses."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion
[/quote]
Do you know the address of any good money-changer ?
I have too many jars of shekels.
Quoting a mythological text, or a text that is nothing more that a statement of belief may be an assertion, but it's of no more truth value than quoting any other myth.
The average life-time at the turn of the millennium was 30 years. Two lifetimes later, a writer would have no clue what had actually happened, if indeed anything happened. The concept of "proceeding through" a "passion" to achieve forgiveness was a typical meme of the age, and was used for a number of savior-gods, in a number of the cults which sprung up at the time.. It was not at all unique to the Jesus figure. No Galilean peasants were ever brought in front of Roman aristocrats or afforded a trial. They were simply executed, by "standing order" during the Pax Romana. If indeed he had caused a ruckus in the temple, that's all that would have been needed to grab him, and execute him. One of the gospels said he was silent, (to meet the "lamb before the slaughter" idea), in another, (John), he gives a long-winded speech full of highly developed theological concepts (which of course, took the Christian Church decades, if not centuries to develop), and with every one of those it becomes more obvious that the concepts would not have and could not have been spoken by a Jesus person early in the 1st Century. And then of course, John is full of per-gnostic and gnostic ideas which are so similar to Philo's gnosticism, (50 CE) that Philo may as well have written John himself. The long speech that Jesus gives in John at the "Last Supper", (but with no institution of the Eucharist ??) is a Christian sermon given to an already long extant Christian Church, and not the speech of someone from before it even existed.
The Greek and Latin words corresponding to "crucifixion" applied to many different forms of painful execution, including being impaled on a stake, or affixed to a tree, upright pole (a crux simplex), or (most famous now) to a combination of an upright (in Latin, stipes) and a crossbeam (in Latin, patibulum). Seneca the Younger wrote: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet".[14]
In some cases, the condemned was forced to carry the crossbeam to the place of execution.[15] A whole cross would weigh well over 135 kg (300 lb), but the crossbeam would not be as burdensome, weighing around 45 kg (100 lb).[16] The Roman historian Tacitus records that the city of Rome had a specific place for carrying out executions, situated outside the Esquiline Gate,[17] and had a specific area reserved for the execution of slaves by crucifixion.[18] Upright posts would presumably be fixed permanently in that place, and the crossbeam, with the condemned person perhaps already nailed to it, would then be attached to the post.
The person executed may have been attached to the cross by rope, though nails and other sharp materials are mentioned in a passage by the Judean historian Josephus, where he states that at the Siege of Jerusalem (70), "the soldiers out of rage and hatred, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest".[19] Objects used in the crucifixion of criminals, such as nails, were sought as amulets with perceived medicinal qualities.[20]
While a crucifixion was an execution, it was also a humiliation, by making the condemned as vulnerable as possible. Although artists have traditionally depicted the figure on a cross with a loin cloth or a covering of the genitals, the person being crucified was usually stripped naked. Writings by Seneca the Younger state some victims suffered a stick forced upwards through their groin.[21][22] Despite its frequent use by the Romans, the horrors of crucifixion did not escape criticism by some eminent Roman orators. Cicero, for example, described crucifixion as "a most cruel and disgusting punishment",[23] and suggested that "the very mention of the cross should be far removed not only from a Roman citizen's body, but from his mind, his eyes, his ears".[24] Elsewhere he says, "It is a crime to bind a Roman citizen; to scourge him is a wickedness; to put him to death is almost parricide. What shall I say of crucifying him? So guilty an action cannot by any possibility be adequately expressed by any name bad enough for it."[25]
Frequently, the legs of the person executed were broken or shattered with an iron club, an act called crurifragium, which was also frequently applied without crucifixion to slaves.[26] This act hastened the death of the person but was also meant to deter those who observed the crucifixion from committing offenses."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion
(April 15, 2019 at 10:17 am)Lemon Curry Wrote: [quote pid='1900670' dateline='1555337523']
You may use Shekels or may convert to any currency of today.
[/quote]
Do you know the address of any good money-changer ?
I have too many jars of shekels.
(April 15, 2019 at 12:31 pm)Drich Wrote: [quote pid='1900690' dateline='1555341024']
Sorry sport that is a quotation not an assertion.
Assertion:
Dictionary
as·ser·tion
/əˈsərSH(ə)n/
noun
Quoting a mythological text, or a text that is nothing more that a statement of belief may be an assertion, but it's of no more truth value than quoting any other myth.
The average life-time at the turn of the millennium was 30 years. Two lifetimes later, a writer would have no clue what had actually happened, if indeed anything happened. The concept of "proceeding through" a "passion" to achieve forgiveness was a typical meme of the age, and was used for a number of savior-gods, in a number of the cults which sprung up at the time.. It was not at all unique to the Jesus figure. No Galilean peasants were ever brought in front of Roman aristocrats or afforded a trial. They were simply executed, by "standing order" during the Pax Romana. If indeed he had caused a ruckus in the temple, that's all that would have been needed to grab him, and execute him. One of the gospels said he was silent, (to meet the "lamb before the slaughter" idea), in another, (John), he gives a long-winded speech full of highly developed theological concepts (which of course, took the Christian Church decades, if not centuries to develop), and with every one of those it becomes more obvious that the concepts would not have and could not have been spoken by a Jesus person early in the 1st Century. And then of course, John is full of per-gnostic and gnostic ideas which are so similar to Philo's gnosticism, (50 CE) that Philo may as well have written John himself. The long speech that Jesus gives in John at the "Last Supper", (but with no institution of the Eucharist ??) is a Christian sermon given to an already long extant Christian Church, and not the speech of someone from before it even existed.
Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble. - Joseph Campbell 
Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist
Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist
