Points from Letters Surgeon, speaking of Our Lord's Crucifixion, says
that 'every detail of the story suggests that a wounded victim' in some way survived. He knows little of the physical facts of Roman crucifixion, (1) Nails were driven through the wrists at a point close under the juncture of the radius and ulna which involved half- severing the median nerve, with consequent ex- cruciating agony at every subsequent jarring or movement of any kind. This pain usually causes the sufferer to faint frequently. Recent experiments'with dead bodies have shown that if they are nailed through the palms the nails invariably tear through the flesh and sinews and the body collapses, as the hands are not strong enough to support the weight. The earliest pictures show the nail-marks on the wrists. (2) Virtually no weight is born by the feet, by whatever method they arc nailed. They were only fastened to secure immobility. (3) Modes of crucifixion (e.g. by tying with ropes) and the type of cross used differed somewhat, but, in such a case as Our Lord's, death was due to slow suffocation from gradual paralysis of all the respiratory muscles along with the other muscles of the body. This was due to violent and increasing tetanic cramps caused by the fixed and unnatural position of the body with all the weight dependent from the wrists. Another consequence of this position was the sinking of the abdominal organs, notably the liver, and consequent interference with the circulation of the blood, and sinking also of the diaphragm muscle which affected further the functioning of the heart and lungs. In connection with this it is worth noting that a man who, in recent times, crucified himself with ropes to the rafters of his bedroom and was quite soon found and taken down died next day from internal injuries. (4) Crucifixion was one of the commonest modes of execution among the Romans, but though thousands were crucified annually it was an almost unheard-of rarity for anyone to survive liven under the most favourable circumstances, which certainly could not be said to obtain in Our Lord's case.
—M. THOMAS (Miss), Theydon Bois, Essex
We should all be grateful to Surgeon for his brilliant exposure of the truth behind the Resurrec- tion, Those of us lacking a sound grounding in medicine would not realise that in considering Christ's Passion there is no need from a medical point of view even to mention the scourging, the crowning with thorns or the via dolorosa. This treat- ment certainly impresses the guillible layman, but a scientific mind looking squarely at the Gospel account of the preliminary 'softening up' can decide that it does not even merit discussion as a factor which might accelerate death.
—D. RICHARDSON, Sutton, Surrey To say that 'every detail [sic] of the story suggests' that the wounded man was spirited away by his cronies is to accept those parts of the Gospels which can be made to fit this explanation and to ignore the others. I may be forgiven for supposing that, if this is how Surgeon makes a diagnosis, he is very wise indeed not to tell us who he is.
—P. R. MURSELL, East Horsley, Surrey
In crucifixion, death was due, not so much to ex- posure and thirst as to pulmonary congestion and asphyxia. With the body suspended by the wrists, the chest was fixed in the position of full inspiration and in order to breathe it was necessary to rise by extending the legs at every gasp. With increasing weakness, this became impossible and death followed. The breaking of the legs produced the same result, but much more rapidly.
—P. J. PUGH, Redruth, Cornwall There are reasonable alternatives to the canonical Gospels for explanations of the disappearance of Jesus's body. The polemical eighth-century Toldoth Jeshu contains the ancient tradition that the body was buried in a garden and that because of the crowds that came to see the tomb the gardener removed the corpse and, having temporarily deflected a water- course in the garden, buried it and brought back the waters over the grave. In the Gospel of Gantaliel and Arabic Life of Pilate is a tradition that Pilate, having been informed that the body had been stolen, went with the elders to the sepulchre. They found it empty, but the body of a crucified man was found in a well or cistern near by. The elders said it was Jesus, but Joseph and Nicodemus, when sent for, said the grave clothes were his but the body was that of one of the robbers. Pilate, satisfied that it was indeed Jesus's body, ordered it to be buried in a tomb. . . . What really happened on that Easter morning may never be known for certain, but, in contra-distinction, one can be sure that it was not an historical fact but the belief that the Messiah had risen and would re- turn which so suddenly transformed the 'poor craven' disciples, spread the news like wildfire and set a spark to the religious tinder of the Aranuean East. No prac- tical explanation of the disappearance of the body would have had the slighest effect in putting out such a fire once it had started.
—WILLIAM SMITH, Wokingham, Berks
In his letter, published in last week's Spectator, Surgeon says that Pilate 'Specifically refuses to have the tomb guarded overnight.' But in the Gospel of St. Matthew we read that the chief priests and Pharisees came to Pilate and asked permission to have the tomb made sure until the third day, 'lest his disciples come by night and steal him away'—to which Pilate replied shortly, 'Ye have a watch; go your way, make it as sure as ye can.' St. Matthew then goes on to tell how they went their way, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone and setting a watch.
—JAMES BROWN, Finglas, Dublin
Whether Jesus was or was not the Son of God, He is revealed in the Gospels as a man of much courage. Would such a man be content to accept a situation in which he was obliged to remain silent and in hiding? Acceptance would have amounted to a near- betrayal of his followers. Nor is connivance in a false story of Resurrection in keeping with a man of this character.
—COLIN SHAW, Haywards Heath, Sussex Surgeon evidently does not know that in the earliest cycle of Resurrection narratives the word used for the appearing of the Risen Christ is 'OPHDIE,. which strongly suggests that the risen body was spiritual. (And the Pauline accounts, e.g. I Cor. xv, were not written more than some twenty-five years after the events described.) This is confirmed by the difficulty of the disciples in recognising the Risen Christ, by the awe that sprrounded Him, and by His manner of appearing and departing 'the doors being shut.' The fact is, that it is only in the latest and worst NT sources that we have an impression of a more physical body—and by then the Church was up against Gnostic heresies. Of this piece of eighteenth-century rationalism, Dr. James Hastings writes, 'It is incredible that the Roman soldiers should have failed to carry out the execution of a con- demned man and equally incredible that a lacerated and emaciated man . . . should have made the im- pression of having come off as more than a conqueror.' St. Paul makes it very clear that there was something glorious and triumphant about the Risen Christ. The nature of the risen body is outside our knowledge, but it was more real and more glorious than the physical to those who experienced both. It gave the Gethsemane cowards a certainty and assurance that demands an adequate explanation. Finally, Surgeon makes of the Risen Christ a fraud, hoaxer and hypocrite. If such is his judgement of character, is he likely to be a sound guide in any- thing? His implied assessment of the character of the Christ demands and deserves that question.
—N. S. POWER, Birmingham, 16
Before Mrs. Strachey is driven by lack of evidence to deny the physical event of the Resurrection, 1 suggest that she reads the last chapttrs of the Gospels again, particularly Mark xvi, 1-8, Luke xxiv and John xx. It seems to me, from the very way they tell the story, that each author, rightly or wrongly, means what he writes to be taken literally. (I am not so happy with Matthew, I admit.) All three take the trouble to produce as many witnesses as they know of and record nothing without at least one witness. What is more, I can find no great inconsistency be- tween these reports.
—D. C. HANDSCOMB, Christ Church, Oxford
Previous page
