Was Jesus nailed to the cross by the hands or by thewrists?
All my life I have seen and read that Jesus wasaffixed to the cross by piercing his hands with nails. Nevertheless, inthis later decade I have seen many pictures in which Jesus is depicted as beingnailed to the cross through his wrists. I have heard also some weirdscholars backing this nonsense. I am going to demonstrate this falsewith three different arguments: a) anatomically, showing thatthe hand certainly can hold the weight of a person; b) anatomically andbiblically, showing that they could not pierce Jesus' wrists, because it wouldbreak one or more of his bones, and c) biblically only, showingthat the Bible says that it was Jesus' hands that were pierced.
First argument. Those who say that Jesus was nailedthrough the wrists allege that a human body cannot be held to a cross bynailing its hands to it, because the flesh would give way, the hand would rip,and the person would fall. This is a lie.
Those who say such a thing never have seen the dissectionof a human body. I have seen many times the hand being studied incadavers, by medical students. During their first year they have tostudy anatomy. At that time they have to dissect not only the hand butalso the whole body.
The conjunctive tissue of the body of humans and animalsis stronger than a rope. Tendons, transverse ligaments and aponeurosisesare conjunctive tissues. The hand is full of them, as you can see in pictures# 1 and # 2.
All these pictures are taken from the book "AnAtlas of Anatomy", by J. C. Boileau Grant, M.C.;M.B.; Ch. B.; F.R.C.S. Edin, Professor Emeritus of Anatomy in theUniversity of Toronto, Fourth Edition. Pictures numbers 57, 84, 92 and98.
Picture # 1 The Palm
Picture # 2 Dorsum of the hand
It is not possible that tendons of a person's hands,transverse ligaments and aponeurosises, pierced by a nail, give way to let theweight of the body rip the hand, because conjunctive tissue is verystrong. This would only happen in a rotten body, not in a livingman. This wouldn't happen even if the body of Christ was hung from onlyone hand, much less from both. It is not true that Christ was piercedfrom the wrists. This lie was introduced into Christianity by itsenemies, especially by the Russellites.
You may think that your delicate hands would be ripped apartif they were hung. What you need to remember is that Christ's hands werecarpenter hands. Today, you can get an idea about how strong Christ handswere by looking at the hands of any 33 year old carpenter who has been inbuilding houses since he was a teenager.
Second argument. According to the Scripture,Jesus Christ is our Passover Lamb, who was going to be sacrificed. Thatis why he was killed the very same day that the Passover lamb was to bekilled. Paul says so in I Co 5: 7.
"Purgeout therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are
unleavened. For even Christour Passover is sacrificed for us"
( I Co 5: 7 )
In the ordinances of the Passover it is establishedthat no bone must be broken in the lamb. It was a shadow of what was goingto happen later with Jesus, to whom no bone was broken. The Passoverordinances say as follows:
"Inone house shall it be eaten; thou shalt not carry forth ought of the flesh
abroad out of the house; neithershall ye break a bone thereof."
( Ex 12: 46 )
"Theyshall leave none of it unto the morning, nor break any bone of it:
according to all the ordinancesof the Passover they shall keep it."
( Nm 9: 12 )
As we can see, the rite of the Passover forbade breakingany bone of the lamb. That is why the Roman soldiers did not break Jesus'legs when they brought him down from the cross. God would not let them doso.
"Thencame the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other
which was crucified with him. Butwhen they came to Jesus, and saw that
he was dead already, theybroke not his legs; but one of the soldiers with a
spear pierced his side, andforthwith came there out blood and water. And
he that saw it bare record, andhis record is true; and he knoweth that he saith
true, that ye might believe. Forthese things were done, that the scripture
should be fulfilled: A boneof him shall not be broken."
( John 19: 32 - 36 )
If any bone of Jesus Christ could not be broken, then anail could not have been driven through his wrists, because then for sure hiswrist bones would be broken. The wrist has eight bones: scaphoid,lunate, triquetrum, pisiform, trapezium, trapezoid, capitate and hamate. Thesebones are kept tightly together by ligaments, in such a way, that if you drivea nail through the wrist you have to pierce and break some of them.Therefore, Jesus could not be nailed by the wrists, but by the palm of thehand. The five metacarpal bones which constiture the palm of the hand,are separate from each other, and thus a nail can be driven between two of themwithout breaking any. See picture # 3. This means that thehand can be pierced by a nail without breaking a bone, but if the wrist ispierced by a nail, it necessarily will break one or more bones. Seepicture # 4.
Picture # 3 Bones of wrist, palm and fingers
The section of the wrist of the former picture, is enlarged in thenext picture so that you can see that it is impossible to drive a nail throughthe wrist without breaking a bone.
<![if !vml]>
<![endif]>
Picture # 4 Bones of the wrist
Third argument. Above and beyond all these"anatomical" arguments are the biblical arguments. In the Bibleit says several times that Jesus was pierced at his hands and his feet.It never ever mentions the wrists. Why then are people trying to instillin us, by means of pictures and conferences, that Jesus was nailed at hiswrists? What are they up to?
Let us see what Jesus said when he showed himself to apostles.
"Theother disciples therefore said unto him: We have seen the Lord. But
he said unto them: Except Ishall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put
my finger into theprint of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not
believe. And after eight daysagain his disciples were within, and Thomas
with them; then came Jesus, thedoors being shut, and stood in the midst, and
said: Peace be unto you. Then saithhe to Thomas: Reach hither thy finger,
and behold my hands;and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and
be not faithless, but believing."( John 20: 25-27 )
As we can see in this passage, Thomas knew that Jesus'hands were pierced, not his wrists. He expected a hole in his hands,not in his wrists. When Jesus came to them a second time, he showed Thomashis hands, not his wrists. It is evident that it was hishands that were pierced by the nails, not his wrists. This samething can be noticed in other passages. Let us see them.
"Andwhen he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side.Then
were the disciples glad, whenthey saw the Lord."
( John 20: 20 )
"Andhe said unto them, Why are ye troubled?; and why do thoughts arise
in your hearts? Behold myhands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me,
and see; for a spirit hath notflesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when
he had thus spoken, he shewedthem his hands and his feet."
( Luke 24: 38- 40 )
In these two passages we see that for the purpose ofidentifying himself Jesus showed them his hands and his feet, not his wristsand his feet.
If we go to the prophecies of the Old Testament we will alsosee that when foretelling what Jesus was going to go through, they talked abouthis hands, not about his wrists.
"Fordogs have compassed me; the assembly of the wicked have inclosed
me: they pierced my handsand my feet."( Psalms 22: 16 )
"Andone shall say unto him: What are these wounds in thine hands?Then
he shall answer: Those withwhich I was wounded in the house of my friends."
( Zech 13: 6 )
There is not the slightest doubt that Jesus was piercedthrough his hands and not through his wrists, like some weird scholars now wantus to believe.
Nevertheless, I will not be surprised if one of these dayssome weird scholar declares that Jesus was nailed to the cross by his ankles,not by his feet.
There are now somequestionable “scholars” that are trying to convince Christians that in ancienttimes, people never did make a differencebetween “hand” and “wrist”, in order to justify that Jesuswas nailed by the wrist. This isfalse. In ancient times they madea difference between hand and wrist.Both, Latin and Greek have a word for wrist: in Latin, it was, “carpus”,and in Greek it was pronounced very similar but written ,“carpoz”. What these dubious scholars say is not true.
Back to theindex
