LogFAQs > #980071421

s0nicfan posted...

Even if he was crucified, the method was likely different. Crucifixion is about asphyxiation and Romans didn't make a habit of nailing people to the crosses. Having your arms tied up like that collapses your lungs and makes it hard to breathe, forcing you to push up against the little stand you're on to catch your breath and sometimes it can take days for people to die. They most likely would not have taken this one individual, put a crown of thorns on his head, and then nail him to his cross. That makes sense from a Christian perspective, but from a Roman perspective he was just another guy sentenced to die. There would be no reason for them to give him any sort of special treatment.

There would be if he was a symbol of rebellion and they were trying to destroy morale. The crown of thorns part doesn't really make sense though. I also can't imagine the Romans would let spectators help carry the cross.