Forum | Welcome | Debate Rules | Links | Facebook | Twitter | Donate  
Debating Christianity and Religion
The pursuit of knowledge and truth, through God, through science, through civil and engaging debate
 
 FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in

Broken bones of god
is it possible to drive a nail in feet without breaking bone

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Reply to topic    Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Christianity and Apologetics

when nail passes through the feet and comes in other side
bone cracks
100%
 100%  [ 8 ]
it doesnt crack
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 8

Author Message
sin_is_fun Offline
Avatar

Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Total posts: 527

5084.83 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 1: Sun Jan 30, 2005 10:28 pm  Broken bones of god Reply

One of the claims of Bible is that the bones of jesus werent broken.But nails were passed through his feet and wrists(or palm).

Scientifically it is impossible to drive a nail in somebodys feet and make it to come to the other side without the nail passing through the bone.When it is done so, it is impossible not to have atleast a hairline fracture.In fact a nail piercing one side of the feet bone and coming on the otherside itself is fracture.

when nail passes through bone, the bone cracks.It doesnt make an exact hole and passes through the other side.And the nail used on jesus must have been a big one, so the bigger the nail the higher the probablity of fracture.

so how was this prophecy fulfilled?
Back to top
View user's profile   
ST88 Offline
Site Supporter
Guru
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jul 2004
Total posts: 1772
Location: San Diego
Age: 45
Gender: Male

11605.16 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 2: Mon Jan 31, 2005 2:23 am  Re: Broken bones of god Reply

sin_is_fun wrote:
One of the claims of Bible is that the bones of jesus werent broken.But nails were passed through his feet and wrists(or palm).

Scientifically it is impossible to drive a nail in somebodys feet and make it to come to the other side without the nail passing through the bone.When it is done so, it is impossible not to have atleast a hairline fracture.In fact a nail piercing one side of the feet bone and coming on the otherside itself is fracture.

when nail passes through bone, the bone cracks.It doesnt make an exact hole and passes through the other side.And the nail used on jesus must have been a big one, so the bigger the nail the higher the probablity of fracture.

The following link contains some very specific details about the Crucifixion. A word of warning: it is quite graphic, as you would expect a description of this event to be. But it is done in clinical terms, including what crucifixion in general does to the body. It is also written by a Christian.
A Physician Testifies About the Crucifixion

From the description, it's fairly clear that no bones were broken (wrists & arches), although other more vigorous tortures happen to the body.
Back to top
View user's profile   
sofyst Offline
Student
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Total posts: 74
Location: Texas
Age: 29
Gender: Male

508.26 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 3: Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:08 pm   Reply

Has it been scientifically proven not that it is probably unlikely, or improbable, for a nail to pass through the foot without breaking a bone, but that no nail has ever passed through any foot bone without breaking?

What I am asking is if you have scientific evidence that a nail has never passed through any foot bone without it breaking. It matters not whether it is proven that it most likely could not happen; rather it only matters if it has been proven that it has never happened, ever.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website   
bigmrpig Offline
Student
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Total posts: 86
Gender: Undisclosed

558.05 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 4: Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:52 pm   Reply

sofyst wrote:
Has it been scientifically proven not that it is probably unlikely, or improbable, for a nail to pass through the foot without breaking a bone, but that no nail has ever passed through any foot bone without breaking?

What I am asking is if you have scientific evidence that a nail has never passed through any foot bone without it breaking. It matters not whether it is proven that it most likely could not happen; rather it only matters if it has been proven that it has never happened, ever.


You want evidence that a solid object can go straight through another solid object without it breaking? If the nail is through the bone, then that means it created a hole. A solid cannot pass through another solid without making a hole in it. You can't have a pencil stuck through a piece of paper that is completely intact, because if there's a pencil through it, then the paper cannot be intact. It has a hole for the pencil. I don't understand what you're asking for. If there's no hole in the bone, then no nail went through it. If there is a hole, it's broken.

I must not understand what you're asking for, because what it seems to me you asked is quite obvious. If it went through it, it made a hole. If it made a hole, it's broken. So could you please restate what you want?
Back to top
View user's profile   
sofyst Offline
Student
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Total posts: 74
Location: Texas
Age: 29
Gender: Male

508.26 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 5: Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:59 am   Reply

I was unaware that the human foot was made up of one single bone. I thought it was a well known fact that it had many bones within it.



Now, I see some gaps between the Metatarsal bones, yet it may be my biased view which mistakingly sees the black within this picture as not the bones. You may be right though this may be simply one huge bone.

Yet if that common sense will not appease you, let us do a little word study shall we? You say that if one solid object goes through another solid object then it is broken. Let us define broken:

The definition of broken is quite lengthy, therefore I will simply post the address as well as the two main definitions which need to be discussed.

Dictionary.com/broken Now, the first definition of broken is given as: "To cause to separate into pieces suddenly or violently; smash." However I will point out that definition number five is given as: "To crack without separating into pieces."

Which then are we speaking of? Definition number five or the first which is given? If the nails did penetrate bones within Jesus' feet without breaking them into two, then we can say that it was broken, as this act is equal to definition number five.

However, if we were to use the first definition given, and say that something had to be seperated into pieces, given that the nails simply penetrated the bones without breaking them into two, we could say that the bones were not broken, simply penetrated.

So which it be? Are we to say that to be broken something must be split into two? In which case the Scripture would not be lying as Jesus' bones were not split into two. Or are we to use the definition found further down and say that if something is cracked without splitting into two it is still broken and therefore the Scriptures are lying.

Regardless of the fact that it has not yet been scientifically proven that an object can never enter into a human foot without at least fracturing any bone; we must conclude that given the definition of broken (the first definition), the Scriptures can still be telling the truth when they say that no bone upon Jesus was broken (as no bone was split into two).
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website   
bigmrpig Offline
Student
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Total posts: 86
Gender: Undisclosed

558.05 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 6: Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:06 am   Reply

You're right about the definition of broken, and that it depends on the definition you use...

But I was referring to where you said:

Quote:
What I am asking is if you have scientific evidence that a nail has never passed through any foot bone without it breaking.


I was replying to your comment of if it went through the bone, not if it went through a random part of the foot. If it's passing through a foot bone, then it's breaking it (well, depending on the definition. It will puncture it, let's say). If it's passing through the foot in general, then it could miss the bones. I was simply replying to your asking about passing "through any foot bone without breaking." So it really depends on the definition you use.

Dictionary.com also lists...

To fracture (a bone) (of course we still have the definition of fracture to deal with)

To force or make a way through; puncture or penetrate Well, the nail (if it went through the bone) definitely did that.

So it really depends on definitions. And if it hit the bone at all, of course.[/b]
Back to top
View user's profile   
sofyst Offline
Student
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Total posts: 74
Location: Texas
Age: 29
Gender: Male

508.26 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 7: Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:57 am   Reply

Oh yes, I see. Misunderstanding on my part. My utmost apologies.

But you would acknowledge that if even if the bone was penetrated, barring the idea that it had to be penetrated, then it would depend on what definition was being used as to how we would deterimine whether any of Jesus' bones were in fact broken. I am glad you acknowledge that.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website   
sofyst Offline
Student
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Total posts: 74
Location: Texas
Age: 29
Gender: Male

508.26 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 8: Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:02 am   Reply

Let me rephrase my question then, in response to this statement:

sif wrote:
Scientifically it is impossible to drive a nail in somebodys feet and make it to come to the other side without the nail passing through the bone.When it is done so, it is impossible not to have atleast a hairline fracture.In fact a nail piercing one side of the feet bone and coming on the otherside itself is fracture.


Are you claiming that it is scientifically proven that no nail has ever been driven into any foot without the nail passing through, or at least fracturing, a bone?

Are you claiming that nowhere, notime with no one has this ever happened, and science can prove this?

And likewise are you claiming that if the nail were to pass through with only minimally fracturing, with a hairline fracture, that this would still be considered as a broken bone? If so I need to point you to a few posts above where the definition of 'broken' has been given and the question of what broken is has been resolved.

What say you sin is fun? Might I add that yes, sin is fun.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website   
otseng Offline
Savant
Avatar

Joined: 15 Jan 2004
Total posts: 12849

33953.08 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 9: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:38 pm  bones and shroud Reply

ST88 wrote:
sin_is_fun wrote:
One of the claims of Bible is that the bones of jesus werent broken.But nails were passed through his feet and wrists(or palm).

The following link contains some very specific details about the Crucifixion. A word of warning: it is quite graphic, as you would expect a description of this event to be. But it is done in clinical terms, including what crucifixion in general does to the body. It is also written by a Christian.
A Physician Testifies About the Crucifixion

From the description, it's fairly clear that no bones were broken (wrists & arches), although other more vigorous tortures happen to the body.

As ST88 points out, there were no bones broken during the crucifixion. When Jesus was crucified, the nails passed between the bones as he was nailed through the wrists and the feet.

It was commonly believed that the nail went through the palm until it was noticed on the Shroud of Turin that the blood stains were from the wrist instead of the palms.


Source: http://www.shroud.com/shrhands.htm

The nails could have penetrated the wrists without actually breaking any of the carpal bones. Destot theorized that the nail went between the capitate, the semilunar, the triquetral and the hamate bones (Destot's space). Dr Zugibe, an expert on crucifixion, believes that the nail could've gone between the metacarpal bone of the index finger and the capitate and lesser multangular bones of the wrist (the "Z" area).



This shows where the nail could've entered the hand for the nail to go through the "Z" area.

And as sofyst points out, the nail in the feet could've went between the metatarsal bones without actually breaking them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website   
sin_is_fun Offline
Avatar

Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Total posts: 527

5084.83 tokens
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 10: Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:10 pm  Re: bones and shroud Reply

I am happy about the Xrays posted by the faithful.But the gaps you guys point out inbetween the bones are very small.Only a very tiny nail can pass through them.In the movie passion of christ,enormous nails were shown.And logic also suggests that to hang a person only by the support of nails huge nails have to be used.

Can a person hang by small nails through the gaps in his palm bones and a small nail through the leg bones?Please note that two legs were nailed by a single nail.Such a nail has to be monsterous in size.Also one feet was kept above the other.An enormous nail to find exactly the gap between two feet of a person and still powerful enough to suspend him?

In passion of christ the nails pierced the cross and came on the other side of the cross.If such nails were used then more than hairline fracture would have occured.

Statistically the odds for the nails not to pierce the bones is virtual zero.Dont ask me experimental proof for it.Just put your two feet on one another and imagine a huge nail passing through it.

That too roman soldiers hammered many times to get that nail inside his feet and arms.No way that nail found exact gaps.If jesus was hung by such small gaps his hand would have come apart.Also lee strobels case for christ mentions that he was nailed from wrists and not palm.That book says that his hand would have come apart if he was hung by palms.

Your only hope is to say that hairline fracture isnt a fracture at all.Well then you guys have to redefine medical texts then.
Back to top
View user's profile   
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Christianity and Apologetics All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4
Facebook
Tweet

 

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Posted
No new posts How to mend a broken heart Moses Yoder Random Ramblings 2 Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:53 pm View latest post
No new posts Broken picture telephone game. Anyone... playhavock Random Ramblings 10 Sun Sep 02, 2012 9:36 am View latest post
No new posts Broken Covenant - Not Jews Land proudtobechristian Random Ramblings 6 Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:53 am View latest post
No new posts Broken Britain Iftikhar Random Ramblings 2 Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:47 am View latest post
No new posts What is the purpose of a broken watch... byofrcs Philosophy 25 Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:37 am View latest post





Hymn Lyrics Plus

On The Web | New Kind Church | Ecodia | Facebook | Twitter


Lo-Fi Version
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Hosted by Lunarpages.   Produced by Ecodia.
Igloo Theme Release v0.9 Created By: Igloo Inc. and PROX Designs in association with Kazer0 Designs.
Protected by CBACK CrackerTracker
161250 Attacks blocked.