They did, but couldn't tell anyone because the patent hadn't cleared yet.Why didnt they use no more nails to stick jesus to the cross?
ignoring the blasphemous and the unseemly nature of your crass question I notice that the introduction contains a double negative. If you had any intelligence you would know that in English a double negative is the same as using a positive and vise versa, poor show!Why didnt they use no more nails to stick jesus to the cross?
In order to toture him. Also they thought he was worthless, so they figured ';Why waste more nails';?
The roman army was a bit of a stickler for going ';by the book'; if the proceedure was three nails then they would have used three nails. How many more do you need. Also more would have actually made the proceedings LESS of a punishment by either hastening its end (through more trauma and bleeding) and also by giving the body and ';extra'; resting place. Think about trying to rest all your body weight on just those three nails. Excruciating isn't it. That is why I am glad I don't have to go through it because Jesus did it all for me. That is why I thank him every day and love God so much.
Here's an excellent article on crucifixion in antiquity. It might help you with your question.
i think it wasnt invented then ??
The heat would of kept the glue from setting.
...........
for the same reason your mother didn't use birth control!
why would they? that's like asking: why don't they give you more fries in a small?
just...because.
often, pictures or carvings of the death of Christ is misinterpreted. nails are seen nailed through each hand and folded feet; in real life, nails were driven through the two tendons of each hand; if not, the placement of the nails simply through the hands would be unaccustomed to the weight and Jesus would have torn free, ripping his hands literally in two.
It was Easter.
B+Q would have been closed.
Ask yourself why you even thought of that question. Do you think pretending to be weird proves you know the difference? No - either way you are still mentally inadequate.
Perhaps they ran out. They must of because they used only one for the feet.
Why waste more than a few on some loony?
Because it would not have had the same effect!!!
Not sure that would have been invented then. It wouldn't have been such torture really. The nails thing was part of the torture. No one was going to care if he got hurt when they were killing him anyway.
this question is completely unnecessary
Jesus would have been tied to the cross. The nails were only used to inflict pain as you couldn't support a body on the cross using nails through the hands (or wrists) and feet.
Nails are hard and expensive to make.
Perhaps the amount and placement of the nails caused the most agony and were easiest to pound in. I think it would be harder to nail someone through the shoulder...
Romans were expert in the field.
Three wan enough.
cost cut backs
It was unnecessary. What a sadistic question.
Nothing could hold him there: nails, staples or super glue. He came down, to offer us hope. He loves you, babe.
The Lord will save you all the same, you wretch.
B%26amp;Q was probably shut!! lol
Because someone forgot the applicator gun and the stanley knife for cutting the top off. Don't you read your bible????
because they wanted to see him suffer
Because it only took three nails.
The Bible never actually specifies how many nails were used. How many do you think they used, and why do you assume it wasn't enough?
It was Friday and the shops shut early
No comments:
Post a Comment