The Question of the Historical Crucifixion and the Martyrdom of Jesus.

Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.” (Qur’an 9:111)

Every once in awhile a Christian gets the idea that he wants to experience the suffering that Jesus endured on the so called double-cross. So this person will lay down half naked on a beam of wood and gets someone to nail the palms of his hands (or the wrist) and his feet to the beam. When the beam of wood is stood up on its end, the persons’ body weight immediately tears his hands and the feet loose and they slide off the beam in degradation and humiliation.

This happened all to often, and people began to really wonder if the ecclesiastical images of Jesus inspired by painters, having him on the double cross were really true.

Thus, in all effort to make sense of the ecclesiastical images, made popular by paintings, the all too familiar “nailed to the double cross” method, along came the idea that the hands were not only nailed to the cross, but ropes were used to bind the forearms to the horizontal beam. This satisfied the world that such a method would prevent a body from falling off the cross and everyone breathed a sigh of relief.


Matthew, Mark, Luke mention nothing at all about nails in the hands and/or feet.

Remember none of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) mention anything at all about nails.

“Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit des not flesh and bones, as you see me have.” (Luke 24:39)

Only in John’s Gospel do we get:

 “Now Thomas (also known as Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.” (John 20:25)

Nothing about nails in the feet!

We also get this vague passage in Colossians:

“Having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the σταυρῷ (staurō) . (Colossians 2:14)

If the etymology of the verse is stressed, this verse is the only direct indication of any nails used to attach Jesus to the stauros.

“They pierce my hands and feet.” (Psalm 21:16)

Nothing about nails in the feet!


Quite curious when Jesus begins to speak of the passion (according to the evangelist) he does not say much regarding the execution form. He is surprisingly vague.


“And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.” (Mark 8:31)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day”. (Mark 9:31)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? And he answered and told them, Elias verily come first, and restore all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be held in contempt.” (Mark 9:11-12)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles:  And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.” (Mark 10:33-34)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!


“Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.” (Luke 9:22)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

” Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men. But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask him of that saying.” (Luke 9:43-44)

This is certainly the writing of a redactor. It is third person. Here the writer is emphatic that they did not understand this statement. It was hid from them and that they did not perceive the meaning of it. Why not just ask him to explain it? Well apparently, “they feared to ask him about“. It is not explained.

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

We get much the same in the following passage:

“Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again. The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about. (Luke 18:31-34)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!



“And as Moses lifted up (exalted) the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up (exalted).”(John 3:14) This saying may imply some kind of suspension, but nothing more.

The the right is the god Asclepius. The god of medicine, healing, and rejuvenation. Here he is pictured with is serpent entwined staff. On the left is a depiction of the Prophet Moses exalting the snake on a staff. You will find this incident in Numbers 29:6-9

Christians seem to be embarrassed by the idea of Jesus comparing himself to being exalted like the healing snake that Moses put on the pole. However, that healing snake obviously is not the Satan snake of Genesis, as that Satan snake was cursed by God, and the healing snake on Moses pole was directed by God.

Just like Jesus was taken to be worshipped as a false god, so too the snake on the pole was taken to be worshipped. So King Hezekiah did the following:  

“Over time that He removed the high places, smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles. He broke into pieces the bronze snake Moses had made, for up to that time the Israelites had been burning incense to it. (It was called Nehushtan.)” (2 Kings 18:4)


“From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.” (Matthew 16:21)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.” (Matthew 17:22-23)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and ; σταυρώσετε stauosete others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.” (Matthew 23:34)

Notice that it says here: “Some of them you will kill and stauosete.”

The prophets, sages, and teachers will be killed and some type of suspension/impaling will follow. Also note that this is an act that the religious Jews carry out. Jesus does not connect σταυρώσετε stauosete to himself here. What ever σταυρώσετε stauosete means it has to be a punishment that religious Jews would carry out. Otherwise Jesus, would be ignorant of Jewish law!

Jew’s don’t crucify people! They do not suspend people on a double cross!

“Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,  And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him staurosai σταυρῶσαι : and the third day he shall rise again.” (Matthew 20:18-19)

Matthew adds here for the first time that the end of Jesus life will be connected with an act referred to with suspension/impaling.

“And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said to his disciples, You know that after two days is the feast of the Passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be staurothenai σταυρωθῆναι .  Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, at the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas.  And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.” (Matthew 26:1-4)

The second time that the end of Jesus life will be connected with an act referred to with suspension/impaling


In the Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John Jesus does not connect his death with (σταυρόω) stauroó at all!

Only in Matthew do we see two passages where Jesus connects his death with (σταυρόω) stauroó. We also know that what ever (staurothenai σταυρωθῆναι) means in Matthew 26, and (staurosai σταυρῶσαι) in Matthew 20, Jesus connects (stauosete σταυρώσετε) in Matthew 23 with an act that the Jews do!


 As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, “CrΣταύρωσον! CrΣταύρωσον !” (Stauroson) But Pilate answered, “You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.” (John 19:6)

Why would Pilate tell the chief priest and their officials to “crucify” or σταυρώσατε (staurosate) Jesus if:

  1. They had no power to do so.
  2. Pilate was aware of their laws?

Jew’s don’t crucify people! They do not suspend people on a double cross!

Had the Jewish authorities been directly involved, Jesus would have been stoned, or he would have been killed and then impaled.

“Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him.” (Acts 7:52)

“While they threw stones at Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”  After that he fell on his knees and cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died.” (Acts 7:59-60)

“However, biblical law prescribes hanging after execution: every person found guilty of a capital offense and put to death had to be impaled on a stake (Deut. 21:22); but the body had to be taken down the same day and buried before nightfall, “for an impaled body is an affront to God” (ibid., 23).”


“Then said Pilate unto him, Why do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to (σταυρῶσαί) staurōsai you, and have power to release you?” (John 19:10)

“But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, (σταύρωσον) staurōson him. Pilate said to them, Shall I (σταυρώσω) staurōsō your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he over to them to be (σταυρωθῇ) staurōthē. And they took Jesus, and led him away.” (John 19:15-16)

 “Pilate said unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all said to him, Let him be (Σταυρωθήτω) Staurōthētō. And the governor said, Why, what evil has he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be (Σταυρωθήτω) Staurōthētō.” (Matthew 27:22-23)

“Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be (σταυρωθῇ) staurōthē.” (Matthew 27:26)

“And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to (σταυρῶσαι) staurōsai him.” (Matthew 27:31)

“And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas: (Who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, was cast into prison.) Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spoke to them again. But they cried, saying, (Σταύρου) Staurou (σταύρου staurou).  And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil has he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.  And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be (σταυρωθῆναι) staurōthēnai. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.” (Luke 23:18-23)

And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

“And he released unto them him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will.” (Luke 23:24-25)

 “And they cried out again, (Σταύρωσον) Staurōson him. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil has he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, (σταυρωθῇ) staurōthē him.” (Mark 15:13-14)

“And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to σταυρώσωσιν staurōsōsin him.” (Mark 15:20)

THE CONCLUSION: It is clear from this narrative that the Roman authorities are looked upon as reluctant and even sympathetic to Jesus. Where as the Jews are being looked at as antagonist. If the above accounts are to be harmonized than what ever one understands the terminology for (σταυρόω) stauroó to mean it must be understood in light of Pilate’s statement. “You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him. (John 19:6)

WHO CARRIED THE (σταυρὸν) stauron AND WHY?

The general public thinks that Jesus carried the cross-shaped execution tool († or T), influenced by ecclesiastical paintings and art-history. The common interpretation that Jesus was carrying the crossbeam (patibulum) is not supported by the Biblical text. The theory may be based on the centuries of ecclesiastical paintings, and/or other art work that would lead to the seemingly logical conclusion that a solid pole together with a solid crossbeam out would be too heavy to be carried. Thus, according to this view Jesus must have been carrying only a part (assumed to the crossbeam) of the execution tool (the assumed cross).

“And they compelled one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his (σταυρὸν) stauron.” (Mark 15:20-21)

“As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the (σταυρὸν) stauron.” (Matthew 27:32)

“As the soldiers led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the (σταυρὸν) stauron on him and made him carry it behind Jesus.” (Luke 23:26)

When it comes to the walk towards Calvary, the gospels do not say that Jesus fell or struggled under the weight of the stauros, contrary to the common assumption. The synoptic gospels say that Simon was forced to carry the staturos, without saying why. The synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke have Simon carrying the stauros. Where as the Gospel of John has Jesus carrying his staturos:

 “And he bearing his (σταυρὸν) stauron went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha.” (John 19:17)

Now notice the synoptic Gospel of Matthew, Mark and Luke do not have Jesus bearing his (σταυρὸν) stauron to being with. Where as John says that Jesus bares it himself. Christians imagine scenarios where Jesus carries the (σταυρὸν) stauron and suddenly he cannot.


This is an example of how Christian evangelist try and make sense of this:

“Well, John 19:17 does say Jesus bore his own cross to Golgotha. And the synoptics say Simon of Cyrene helped part of the way (Mark 15:21; Matthew 27:32; Luke 23:26). This is because of Jesus’ weakened state from being flogged. However, John does not say only Jesus carried the cross the whole way, or that Simon of Cyrene did not help him. That is read into the text. John just chose to omit this part of the journey to Golgotha because it was distracting from the themes of his gospel, such as God’s sovereign plan.”

My Response:

Where does (Mark 15:21; Matthew 27:32; Luke 23:26) mention: “helped part of the way“?? That is correct that John does not say that “only Jesus carried the (σταυρὸν) stauron the whole way or that Simon of Cyrene did not help him.” However, the text also does not say that Simon did help him, or that he carried it part way! That is actually ‘reading into the text‘. You have to wonder what prevented Simon from carrying the (σταυρὸν) stauron all the way?


The whole account of the gospels so far rest solely on the meaning of the diversely used verb stauros. So far nothing has been said about the notorious crossbeam-neither on Jesus (and/or Simon’s) shoulders nor attached to the pole. In fact, nothing is said about the shape or the nature of the execution tool, other than that it was a staturos. As has been seen, the texts describing Simon of Cyrene carrying Jesus stauros do not even indicate that the carried device was a patibulum and are thus futile to use as evidence that the stauros of Jesus resembles the assumed shape of a cross.


“And they (Σταυρώσαντες) Staurōsantes him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.” (Matthew 27:35)

It is perhaps surprising that the act called “crucifixion” by the masses itself is mentioned only in passing. On the matters of what sort of “cross” was used to “crucify” Jesus and how he was fastened, suspended, impaled, hung upon it Matthew is silent. This becomes all the more interesting when you consider that Matthew is the only book in the New Testament where Jesus an act called (staurothenai) σταυρωθῆναι

“Where they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the middle.  And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the (σταυροῦ) staurou. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was (ἐσταυρώθη) estaurōthē was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.” (John 19:18-20)

“Then the soldiers, when they had (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.” (John 19:23)

“Now in the place where he was (ἐσταυρώθη) estaurōthē there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.” (John 19:41)

“And when they had (σταυροῦσιν) staurousin him, they parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take. And it was the third hour, and they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him.” (Mark 15:24-25)

THE CONCLUSION: There is no mention of nails. There is no mention of ropes. There is not much of a description to label what took place as a “historical account.”


“But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.  Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water.” (John 19:33-34)

Comments: Now if they saw that Jesus was already dead, they didn’t have any reason to pierce his side! He was dead already! If they were not sure, what would they have done? They would have broken His legs!

This is the version of Matthew most of you read in your bibles

“The rest said, “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to save him.” (Matthew 27:49)

There is surprising silence about the fact that two of the best manuscripts of the New Testament, the Codices Sinaitcus and Vaticanus, describe Jesus as being killed by a soldier’s spear instead of the suspension per se. Matthew 27:49 according to condex Sinaticus: “The other said, Let [him] be, let us see whether Elijah will come to save him. Another took a spear and pierced his side, and out came water and blood.”

In fact so troubling is this text that Dr. Daniel B Wallace (a prominent defender of the idea that the Bible is inerrant) landed himself in some hot soup!

“Dr. Wallace wrote, “In fact, it has been repeatedly affirmed that no doctrine of Scripture has been affected by these textual differences.” Elsewhere he has adjusted this claim by referring to “cardinal” doctrine and “plausible” variants. I wonder if Dr. Wallace included the doctrine of inerrancy among the doctrines to which he refers. In the same manuscripts that he considers the most reliable (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus), the text of Matthew 27:49 says that Jesus was speared before He died. This textual variant introduces a contradiction with the timing presented in John 19:33-34, where Jesus is speared after His death. I welcome Dr. Wallace to explain how this variant in the “best” manuscripts – a variant which Hort (the most influential compiler of the Revised Text in the 1800’s) regarded as plausibly original – can be embraced without abandoning the doctrine of inerrancy.”


You may also see:


In the synoptic accounts of the gospels, the spear thrust occurs after Jesus has expired on the cross, therefore the Jews who came to see Pilate about the bodies evidently assumed that Jesus and the two thieves would still be alive at that time.


Most Christians envision in their minds that there were three “crosses” at Calvary. There is nothing in the Gospels that would suggest that the thieves (or revolutionaries) were “crucified” in a manner different from Jesus. That is to say there is nothing to suggest three separate “crosses”.

“And with him they (σταυροῦσιν) staurousin two thieves; the one out of his right hand, and the other out of his left. (Mark 15:27)

 “Then were there two thieves (σταυροῦνται) staurountai with him, one out of the right hand, and another out of the left.” (Matthew 27:28)

“And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him, and the malefactors, one out of the right hand, and the other out of the left.” (Luke 23:33)

“Where they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the middle.” (John 19:18)

Now before you dear reader I would suggest you to look at these disparate Christian translations and watch as some of them try to deceitfully pull the wool over your eyes.


“Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the BODIES [PLURAL] would not remain on THE (σταυροῦ) STAUROU [SINGULAR] on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that THEY [PLURAL] might be taken away. So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the FIRST MAN, and then the legs of the OTHER ONE who had been (συσταυρωθέντος systaurōthentos) together with him. But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.” (John 19: 31-33)

You see the Christian translations attempts to cover up the obvious? Doesn’t John say that there were BODIES (PLURAL) on a [SINGULAR]  STAUROU? What these verses tell us is that three men were attached to ONE staurou! 

John 19:32 further substantiates this fact: The Greek word systaurōthentos not only means that the two criminals were simply “with him,” but that both of them were also suspended/impaled “together with him” -“together with him” on the SAME STAUROU!

One more final point as the icing on the cake. Now imagine the popular ecclesiastical images of Jesus with the two thieves, one to his right and one to his left. For example the image posted above. If one robber was crucified on a separate cross on Jesus LEFT side and the other robber was on his RIGHT (THREE crosses, placed side by side by side) with Jesus in the MIDDLE, then this becomes a huge problem with the deaths of the two robbers. This is because the soldiers who killed FIRST the two robbers and LAST they came to Jesus in the MIDDLE to kill him. Jesus being in the MIDDLE would have made him the SECOND to be killed!


  1. First was deception through translations which we saw on display above.
  2. Realizing that not everyone has the I.Q of a Turnip they had to come up with some strategies.

Since the New Testament called those crucified with the Messiah both robbers (Matthew 27:38) and also malefactors (criminals) (Luke 23:32), One Christian scholar, proposed that there were two malefactors and also two robbers! So we now have a row of five crosses!

The Roman soldiers came to the first one broke his legs, then the second broke his legs and than to Jesus, didn’t break his legs and proceeded on down the row. Even though this interpretation is a valiant effort it still goes against the fact that the two malefactors were two robbers. Also, when we go back and look at the four text in the first section, it is obvious there is only two mentioned; one on each side.

To this Christian scholar’s credit he realized the problem. How could the soldiers first break the legs of the two robbers and then come to Jesus who was in the middle of them?

Actually, the answer is quite simple! They walked AROUND the (σταυροῦ) staurou breaking legs as necessary to hasten death!


It is clear from reading these text we do not get the ecclesiastical images of Jesus inspired by painters, having him and two thieves beside him on the double crosses.


He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spoke unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be (σταυρωθῆναι) staurōthēnai, and the third day rise again. (Luke 24:6-7)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken by two super natural beings, angels, about Jesus.

“And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him.” (Luke 24:20)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken about Jesus.

“And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not: for I know that you seek Jesus, which was (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon.” (Matthew 28:5)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken by a super natural being, an angel, about Jesus.

“And he said unto them, Be not affrighted: You seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.” (Mark 16:6)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken by a super natural being, an angel, about Jesus.

THE CONCLUSION: In his post death appearances. Jesus does not use the word(σταυρωθῆναι) staurothenai in connection to his death at all!


Well, we don’t even get passed the first book of Acts without the crafty Christians up to their old tricks.

“He was delivered up by God’s set plan and foreknowledge, and you, by the hands of the lawless, put Him to death by nailing Him to the cross.” (Acts 2:23)

However, is that what it really says?

 “This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by προσπήξαντες (prospēxantes) (Acts 2:23)

Look at the various translations here:

“So they cast off the anchors and left them in the sea. At the same time they loosened the ropes that tied the steering-oars; then hoisting (ἐπάραντες) eparantes the foresail to the wind, they made for the beach.” (Acts 27:40)

Actually all the term means is to fasten to, to impale. There is no mention of (σταυρόω) stauroó in Acts 2:23. There is no mention of nails at all!

“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made the same Jesus, whom you have (ἐσταυρώσατε) estaurōsate, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:36)

“Knowing this, that our old man is (συνεσταυρώθη) synestaurōthē with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” (Romans 6:6)

From sun and stauroo to impale in company with (literally or figuratively) — crucify with.


(συσταυρωθέντος systaurōthentos) together with him”- (John 19:32)

THE USE OF (κρεμάσαντες) kremasantes ON A (ξύλου) xylou IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

“The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you slew (κρεμάσαντες) kremasantes on a (ξύλου) xylou tree.” (Acts 5:30)

“And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom (κρεμάσαντες) kremasantes on a (ξύλου) xylou tree.” (Acts 10:39)

“And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the (ξύλου) xylou tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.” (Acts 13:29)

“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the (ξύλου xylon) tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes you were healed.” (1 Peter 2:24)

“But we preach Christ (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness.” (1 Corinthians 1:23)

Question: Why would a Messiah who was (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon be a stumbling block to the Jews?

“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, “Cursed is every one that (κρεμάμενος) kremamenos on a (xylou) ξύλου tree.” (Galatians 3:13)

“And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be put to death, and you hang him on a (עֵֽץ) es tree; his body shall not remain all night upon the (הָעֵ֗ץ) ha es tree, but you should surely bury him the same day; for he that is (תָּל֑וּי) ta-lui hanged is accursed by God; that you defile not the land which God gave you gives you for an inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 21:22-23)

Paul’s usage of the text puts the definitive question in focus. The implied definition of the present investigation. Deuteronomy 21:22-23 is OUTSIDE the boundaries of the ecclesiastical “crucifixion.” To put it in other words, Jesus, was execution by some type suspension or impalement. ,and that is not what Deuteronomy 21:22-23 describes. Paul nevertheless connects the text of Deuteronomy with the death of Jesus.

Thus, Paul connects the death of Jesus, as an ante-mortem suspension, with the text of Deuteronomy 21:22-23, which describes a post-mortem suspension. He connects an event with the boundaries of the definition of the ecclesiastical label “crucifixion” with a text that describes an event that fall out side those boundaries.

Is it then possible to uphold a definition that contradicts the view of Paul?

The present day reader sees a distinct punishment form called the ecclesiastical “crucifixion” which is not compatible with Deuteronomy 21:22-23. For Paul refers to a diverse suspension punishment in which a person could be suspended/impaled alive in order to be killed (like Jesus) or suspended/impaled as a corpse after an execution (as in Deut 21:22-23).

Paul’s point of view in Galatians 3:13 is that Jesus could have been stoned before being suspended/impaled -post mortem. He would be a curse anyhow.

Remember a few previous points!

“Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and ; σταυρώσετε stauosete others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.” (Matthew 23:34)

As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, “CrΣταύρωσον! CrΣταύρωσον !” (Stauroson) But Pilate answered, “You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.” (John 19:6)

“However, biblical law prescribes hanging after execution: every person found guilty of a capital offense and put to death had to be impaled on a stake (Deut. 21:22); but the body had to be taken down the same day and buried before nightfall, “for an impaled body is an affront to God” (ibid., 23).”



I drew the conclusion that the Jews did not kill Jesus, the Romans did. The text are written to make the Romans look reluctant to kill Jesus. I believe the Romans wanted Jesus dead. The Jews are portrayed as the ones who killed Jesus. I do not believe that Jesus was some type of pacifists teacher either.

So, if I may allow me to clarify, the concept that Jesus died on, The “cross” or the “double cross” rather, as a cross would actually be one beam and a double cross would be two beams; it did not happen. The most revered ecclesiastical icon of all of Christianity is a historical fraud. Jesus didn’t die with relative dignity hanging from the cross. He died, suspended on one single stake penetrating his body: he was impaled. There were no nails, no hands or feet tied, he did not die on a cross-shaped execution tool († or T). Just a stake right into his body upon which he was suspended – that is the most logical and plausible form of execution of Jesus by far…

Furthermore, one of the alleged witnesses, St. Mark, tells us that at the most critical juncture in the life
of Jesus — “All his disciples forsook him and fled“- (Mark 14:50).

The Roman spectacle of impalement was meant to be as savage and tortuously cruel as possible because it had to accomplish two things.

1.To act as a visual deterrent to crime and in the case of Jesus -uprising against an oppressive regime.

2. To provide a theatre of gore to satisfy the blood lust of those who came to watch. The spike was the centerpiece of this typically gruesome Roman conception. That is why they didn’t just kill Jesus with a sword and be done with it.

Most likely the Romans introduced the tip of the spike into the victims back side and continued hammering it, pushing it in far enough to where it passed under the pelvic bone so it would support the body on the impale.

The two thieves (most likely really guilty of sedition) get the same treatment. When the impale device was upright it kept the victims body from being torn loose by his own weight and sliding off. That was its practical use.

But there was also a kind of diabolical sideshow, something to further attract the viewer interest in the impalement process. With the spike thrust under the pelvic bone, but not yet coming out of the body a man could use the leverage of his arms and his legs to project his body outward, curving it away from the impale and thus preventing the spike from penetrating any further up into the bowels. But as one’s arms gave out, one’s body would slowly sink down on the spike, causing the spike to penetrate further along through one’s maze of intestines.

Eventually, after the leg strength also gave out, all leverage was lost and the body, of its own weight, would slump/slide back against the vertical beam, driving the spike slightly upwards through the body’s maze of vital organs until it pierced the stomach lining from the inside out, spewing blood and guts all over the ground.

Mercifully, death usually followed in a short time thereafter. When it came to devising fiendish methods of torture and death, the Romans were absolutely without equal. They left no sadistic, bloodthirsty detail behind. The Romans were filthy beast!

It is also reasonable that Jesus hastened his own death by forcing his body down on the spike an extremely awesome and heroic achievement! It indicates that Jesus had no fear of death. I imagine Jesus looking on at the Romans, with a certain look in his eye as if to say, “Go ahead make my day!” Where as the two thieves (most likely rebels) used all their strength to cling to life as long as possible. Hence, the breaking of the legs!


“Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to eat from the (ξύλου) xylou tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.” (Revelation 2:7)

 “And do not say of those who are killed in the way of Allah that they are dead; they are alive even though you do not perceive it.” (Qur’an 2:154)

To read more…

No Mahdi / Jesus is Dead



Filed under Uncategorized

8 responses to “The Question of the Historical Crucifixion and the Martyrdom of Jesus.

  1. Toby

    May I ask if there are any Ibadi texts in English translation that discuss this matter ?

  2. Toby

    If I may ask, given your perspective that Christ is dead and shall never return, what was the purpose of his earthly mission, what differentiates him from any number of martyred Jewish mystic miracle workers common in Roman Judaea and what message did his disciples follow regarding the fate of their Master ?

    • “number of martyred Jewish mystic miracle workers common in Roman Judaea.” Do you perhaps have a list of such individuals with their biographies for comparison/contrast with Christ Jesus?

      Thank you.

      “what was the purpose of his earthly mission.”

      “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.” (John 1:6-8)

      Aaron was a Prophet as was Moses and yet Moses himself testified to a prophet to come after him like him (Deut 18:18)

      John was a Prophet like Jesus and yet Jesus himself testified to a prophet to come after him.

      “”O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad.” (Qur’an 61:6)

      “and what message did his disciples follow regarding the fate of their Master ?”

      ” As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, “CrΣταύρωσον! CrΣταύρωσον !” (Stauroson) But Pilate answered, “You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.” (John 19:6)

      What ever Pilate envisioned the Jews themselves were capable of in regards to ““You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him.”
      I would imagine this would be what they conveyed.

      What I find extremely fascinating is how Christians centuries later are able to pin point numerous “prophecies” in regards to a Messiah coming and dying and rising on the third day and yet Christ own disciples didn’t see the seemingly obvious.

      Holy writ was able to accomplish and extrapolate to Christians centuries later what Christ in the flesh was unable to for his immediate disciples.

      “For they still did not understand from the Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.” (John 20:9)

  3. Toby

    Additionally, i fear that the overwhelming majority of the Ulema castigate your view:

    • I do apologize but I feel you are only bringing up points that were already addressed.

      The overwhelming majority of Muslims believe the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated, that they will see Allah in the next life, that believers can go to hell and leave it. Those views are all incorrect.

      I’ve Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah. I listened to the 8 minute clip and he made many statements that Christians themselves would wonder about. Such as the first major theological dispute among Christians. How does he come to this conclusion? What evidences does he bring?

      Nothing else is substantive.

  4. Toby

    Dear Sir-Please forgive my constant questioning. It is so rare to find a Muslim who holds your particular view regarding the Crucifixion. You provide an Islamic argument against the frankly rather vague ideas swirling around the Islamic portions of the Internet, most of which are variations upon the Swoon and Substitution theories. In my curiosity, I merely wished to be quite clear on your view regarding this most important of matters. Once again, I apologise. If I may ask, can you suggest any other Ibadi resources on the matter of the Crucifixion ?
    With all due respect to the Sheikh, the Apocryphal Acts of John openly and clearly refer to Christ as God. It refers to Christ as “the mighty Lord and King of everything that has breath and flesh, the Word and Son of the living One”, as “our God, Jesus Christ”, and as “the root of immortality, and the fountain of in-corruption, and the seat of the ages”. None of these statements are even remotely Islamic in nature. Additionally docetism is defined as the doctrine which proclaimed that Jesus Christ’s physical body was an illusion, and as such those who held to this doctrine not only denied the literal Crucifixion, but also denied that Christ possessed any physical existence at all, but was fully divine. How is this in any way in harmony with Islam ? The answer of course is that it is not.
    Additionally the Docetists also proclaimed Christ was fully divine, only appearing to be human as an illusion. The followers of Basilides proclaimed that “the self-existent Father, seeing their danger, sent His first-begotten Nous, the Christ, for the salvation of such as believe in Him: He appeared on earth as a man, and wrought miracles, but He did not suffer; for Simon of Cyrene was compelled to bear His cross, and was crucified for Him; he was transformed into the likeness of Jesus, and Jesus took the form of Simon, and looked on, laughing at the folly and ignorance of the Jews”. None of this is compatible with Islam, and all I can hope is that the Sheikh is simply ignorant.

    • No, worries. I hope I did not come across as impatient. You have been respectful and I am deeply grateful for it. Yes, the Sheikhs quotation of Apocryphal Acts of John is problematic. Also so is his misquotation of the verse in question: 4:157 as well as his attribution to Christ Jesus a false statement, about being baptized with the fire and the sword.

      The sources for us as Muslims are the Qur’an and the rigorously authentic oral traditions. If the traditions clash with the Qur’an and can be harmonized than we harmonize them, if they cannot be harmonized humility and deference to the Qur’an must lead us to the conclusion that there was an error in the oral tradition that slipped the critique of the hadith masters.

      Tafsir, commentaries, it is not sacred writ. Insh’Allah I will make a post concerning this and the respected Sheikhs statements.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s