After reading up on this it seems like Jesus pussed out by taking an afternoon's crucifixion over a week's impalement. Now that's suffering. So why take crucifixion instead? Think about it.
A messiah on a cross with arms wide is a more appealing symbol than a messiah-ke-bob with a spike up his ass. Imagine the statues and symbols of the latter adorning the altars, necklaces, and shrines of the world.
Think of poor Doubting Thomas. What does he do to verify the wounds of the risen impaled Jesus? ("Until I push my fist up his gaping backside, I will not believe.") And just imagine what impalement stigmata would be like. (Padre Pio: "I've been walking funny and shitting jets of blood for a week! Praise his holy name!")
Maybe Jesus wasn't wimping out, so much as engaging in a bit of far-sighted public relations.
In ancient Rome, the term "crucifixion" could also refer to impalement. This derives in part because the term for the one portion of a cross is synonymous with the term for a stake, so that when mentioned in historical sources without specific context, the exact method of execution, whether crucifixion or impalement, can be unclear. [...] The longitudinal penetration could be through the rectum, through the vagina, or through a wound opened specifically for the occasion, such as making a transverse incision to the os sacrum. [...] The survival time on the stake is quite variedly reported, from instantly or to a few minutes to a few hours or 1 to 3 days. The Dutch overlords at Batavia, present day Jakarta, seem to have been particularly proficient in prolonging the lifetime of the impaled, one witnessing a man surviving 6 days on the stake, another hearing from local surgeons that some could survive 8 or more days.
Well, it means that if Jesus was gay as some speculate, he wasn't a size queen. (j/k)
Some speculate that the Jewish King David was gay, and there is a Bible verse to incite such speculation, but everybody ignores it.
Ah so you have found it (or should I say verses). The first time I uncovered such passages was seven years ago in my Old Testament class in seminary. When I saw them, I thought: WTF!, and the professor glossed over them. I looked around the room to see if anyone else caught what I had read, and yet no one seemed to notice what was suggested within them. At best, what was said of them was "David and Johnathan were very close friends," and the love spoken of between them was in a fraternal context, rather than any suggestion that what was revealed was homosexual.
Needless to say, it left me scratching my head as to why no one else saw what I had seen. Of course, I rationalized my way out of the predicament in order to maintain orthodoxy.
According to a thesis published in 2010 in Sweden, there may not have actually been crucifixion at the time Jesus was alleged to have been killed. This got buried in a hurry :) Here's an article about it.
It's not surprising that although the thesis was never repudiated, it was buried under a mountain of dust. It was such a bombshell, you'd think if there was a repudiation, that it would have come fast and furious - but no. Silence and a hope that it would all go away, was the response from the christian organisations.
Hanging him upside down would have caused the blood to rush to his head, and he would have passed out quite soon after he was 'posted'. Not quite as brave, after all...
On a recent edition of “Qi” it was mentioned that the Spanish Inquisition used to impale their victims in such a way that it did take between 5-7 days to die. It entered their anus and gravity took over. It passed up through them, missing vital organs and eventually exited through their shoulder blade. The Inquisition itself lasted a few hundred years. Any Catholics about that would like to comment?
I had a thought once that the Catholic Church had created such a hatred of Jews and murdered so many of them that Hitler remained unchallenged for too long. If the Catholic Church was not so steeped in anti-Jewish pogroms itself it might have acted to halt Hitler’s rise to power. A little off topic….and this is a great topic….thanks Gallup’s Mirror.
See, it does not work at all....
Christ, you know it aint easy. You know how hard it can be.
The way things are going. They're gonna impale me
I was thinking of how vampires would react to a Jesus on a skewer rather than on a cross. They might not back off so quickly…:-).
I had been searching for a routine by a comedian and was initially impeded by not even remembering his name. I found that: Jake Johannsen. But of all the video and audio files on the web I can't find the one I want. The closest I could come to the bit was this description by someone else:
"It started when he saw "soap on a rope" (which was an 80s thing, it was a bar of soap that you could wear like a necklace). He envisioned a religion where people wore soap on a rope instead of crucifixes. The adherents of the religion believed that rather than dying on the cross, Jesus actually slipped in the shower after the last supper, and hit his head and died. The whole cross thing, they believed, was a cover up. Rather than cross themselves, the worshipers would wave their arms and shout "wooooaaah" (as if they were slipping and falling in the shower). In their temples, rather than hanging large crosses from the ceiling, they would hang a bathtub."
Teach the controversy!
* * * * *
@Belle Rose - "Ew....gross!"
I had to laugh when I read this since I inferred that you might not consider the crucifixion gross. I don't know if you intended to imply that. Since both are torturous deaths and had heard of impaling before, I consider both "gross".
* * * * *
@Reg re vampires
You do know the common stereotype of vampire hunters has them wielding a stake also, right? :D
* * * * *
If they determine that Christ was impaled, does that mean people who engage in anal sex are more holy?
Or just hole-y?
You're raising an interesting question. It's like the Sherlock Holmes books where this master criiminal Moriarty is so bad because he runs prostitutes, knocks off enemies, and sells addictive drugs. Today, that's not so shocking. Any local big city drug lord does all that and worse.
So, why wasn't Jesus torn about by a pack of wolves or fed to the Lions? After all, he could always have arisen from the dead out of their stools, right?