Crucifixion- The medical evidence

Dr Imran Khan

Introduction

Crucifixion was traditionally used as a method of execution by which a person was

hanged, usually by the arms, from a cross or pole like structure until death. It was
outlawed in the Roman Empire by Constantine in 341 C.E. however was subsequently
used sporadically. Archaeological excavations of the remains of a crucified victim in
1995, stimulated various studies of the methods used. (Holoubek & Holoubek 1995)
In modern times, the medical profession has shown considerable interest in crucifixion.
It is of note that the premise of the majority of these articles is to determine how
crucified individuals actually died; with a distinct focus on the figure of Jesus of
Nazareth (as).

Maslen & Mitchel (2006), following a medical literature review, summarised the 9
different proposed (Table 1) causes of death of Jesus of Nazareth (as). Lloyd- Davies
(1991) argued that in a limited proportion of cases of crucifixion, the victim only
appeared to die (‘swooned’), and recovered consciousness once brought down from the
cross.

Table 1 A representative selection of medical hypotheses for the cause of death of

Jesus, or crucifixion in general, reproduced from Maslen & Mitchel (2006).

Cause of death Background of author

Cardiac rupture Physician
Heart failure Physician
Hypovolaemic shock Forensic pathologist
Syncope Surgeon
Acidosis Physician
Asphyxia Surgeon
Arrhythmia plus asphyxia Pathologist
Pulmonary embolism Haematologist
Voluntary surrender of life Physician
Didn’t actually die Physician

From the above table taken from Maslen & Mitchel’s (2006) paper, it is clear as
postulated in their paper, that when a large number of theories are proposed (from a
variety of different medical specialities) for a problem in any scientific discipline, this in
itself demonstrates that there is no clear evidence indicating the answer.
This is also noted by Dewey & Arthur (2016), who state that both scholars and believers
assume that the passion tradition delivers a report of what actually happened. They
further state “there is no iconographic evidence found featuring the death of Jesus until
the fifth century”. Furthermore, when analysing the biblical texts pertaining to the
Passion narrative, it is important to note that the oral and literary traditions were the sole
media through which the memory of the alleged death of Jesus (as) was transmitted.
Thus the workings of memory are often crucially forgotten by our dear Christian
apologists. Furthermore the textual analysis of the biblical texts very much relies on the
accuracy of the translation of the language that the original text was written in.
In order to avoid any confusion, for the purpose of this paper, I will attempt to perform a
textual analysis of the passion narrative from a medical perspective with the assumption
that the cognition of the authors/transmitters was not a factor in terms of their
authenticity or accuracy. It can be reiterated that the traditions and medical evidence of
the death of Jesus of Nazareth (as) are anything but simple.

The ‘Crucifixion Procedure’

Maslen & Mitchel’s (2006) paper analysed over 40 articles and books by physicians,
historians and archaeologists that discussed the medical causes of death in crucifixion.
They note that the majority of written evidence regarding the details of crucifixion has
been limited to eyewitness accounts. Interestingly the most detailed accounts are the
Gospel accounts of the alleged death of Jesus of Nazareth(as).

Lucius Anneus Seneca (4BCE-65CE) recorded another mass crucifixion and wrote:
`I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have
their victims with their head down to the ground, some impale their private parts, others
stretch out their arms'. (Seneca 1840)

The Scourging of Jesus of Nazareth (as)

John 19: 1-3

1. Therefore Pilate took Jesus and flogged him.

3. And they were coming to him and were saying: “Hail the King of the Jews!” and
they were giving him slaps.

According to Roman law the act of scourging by Roman soldiers pre-cursed the capital
punishment of the Crucifixion of a male. [Citation? Was this invariably the case? If so,
then the two thieves beside jesus a.s. were also flogged] Scourging was performed with
wooden staves or a short whip (flagellum, flagrum) with several leather thongs into
which small balls or sharp sheep bone fragments may have been tied [shroud analysis
suggests dumb-bell shaped balls were used, but no bone fragments. You say ‘may’; is
there any historical evidence for this?]. Although it is often mentioned by Christian
apologists that the victim would often be stripped naked, tied to an upright post and then
across the back, buttocks and legs by one or two soldiers, it is not clear from the biblical
passages whether scourging was applied to the front of the body as well. (Maslen &
Mitchel 2006) [Barry Shwortz shroud photogapher said at jalsa that the shroud indicates
that the front of the body was flogged as well, for it depended on the roman soldier
stepping slightly forward for this to occur]

According to Jewish law scourging was limited to 39-40 blows. The extent of the
scourging generally depended largely on the inclination of the lictores, but invariably
caused severe pain and bleeding. (Retief & Cilliers 2003) [Is this citation stating
invariable severity of scourging based on historical evidence from roman times?] The
question that arises is why would be soldiers severely scourge the body of Jesus (as)
after Pilate initially had found him to be innocent of the charges levelled upon him. As
there is no specific mention regarding the extent of the scourging or flogging in the
passion narrative one is unable to affirm the extreme scourging that is often presented
by Christian medical authors and apologists alike [Note: Zugibe says that the scourging
was brutal in the case of jesus a.s., and this exageration is necessary for otherwise, the
case for death becomes weak].

Many Christian medical authors such as Zugibe (2005) state that ‘pericarditis’
(inflammation of the sac surrounding the heart caused by the alleged severe scourging
/flogging by the soldiers) would have ensued in a “short span of time”. In the pre-
automobile age, the usual mechanisms of pericarditis included: falls from high places,
blows from a fist, butting of animals.(Kissane & Rose 1961) Although the force of the
blow need not be sufficient to fracture the bony cage, sufficient force is necessary to
cause pericarditis, and from the Passion narrative it is not possible to determine how
severe the flogging was. We know that the soldiers carried out the flogging, and we
know that Pilate was a reluctant executioner in the case of Jesus, so there is a
possibility that the flogging was carried out at the minimal level to appease the Jews in
attendance.

An interesting side note is that some commentators have noted that Luke omits any
reference to any flogging, but speaks of Jesus being “disciplined” (23: 22). (Ahmad
2003) This begs the question as to why such an important part of the passion narrative
was omitted. In summary, if the scourging did occur, it is clear that the biblical passages
do not tell us the extent or severity of the scourging. [Note: one would expect them to
definietely refer to the severity if it was as brutal as Zugibe and others suggest]

The ‘bearing’ of the cross

John 19:

17. And he went out bearing his own cross to what is called the Place of the Cross,
which in Hebrew [is] called Golgotha,

The victim was often obliged to carry the cross to the location of the execution where
the hands and feet of the prisoner were fixed to the cross with either nails or cords, and
the cross erected in any one of a range of orientations. (Maslen & Mitchel 2006) It is not
certain exactly where Golgotha was, but it is likely to have been situated just outside the
walls of Jerusalem. (Ahmad 2003) [is this Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, the ‘muslim
philosopher’ of the time of the Promised Messiah a.s.?]

Scholars have noted that there are no explicit references of the use of nails in the
passion narrative. (Crook, 2012) All scholars agree that the act of Crucifixion was a
drawn out and prolonged form of ‘capital’ punishment. In order to achieve this aim, the
victim's weight may also have been supported on a small seat to prolong the time it took
the man to die. To this end, the biblical accounts do not mention any such device, and
so Christian medical authors state that respiratory failure might have ensued as a
consequence of the inability to inflate the chest sufficiently as the legs could no longer
be used to support the weight of the body. (Maslen & Mitchel 2006) The lack of mention
of such a device in the Passion narrative does not allow one to infer that such a device
was not used. Furthermore, Zugibe (2005) counters the respiratory failure mechanism
of death, from his experimental re-enactment of crucifixion. He states that the
asphyxiation cause of death was unlikely as none of the volunteers in his experiment
suffered significant difficulty breathing whilst on the replica cross in the same position as
Jesus of Nazareth (as). In this study, his volunteers were attached to a cross with
leather gloves and their legs were placed with the knees and hips flexed and the soles
of the feet attached using a belt to the front of the cross upright.

The ‘last breath’

Mark 15:

36. And someone ran, after filling a sponge with vinegar, and having placed it on a reed,
was giving it to him to drink, saying: “Let be, let’s see if Elijah comes to take him down. “

37. And Jesus let out a loud cry, and breathed his last.

According to Mark, after receiving the drink of vinegar, Jesus (as) cries out loudly and
“breathes his last”. Ahmad (2003) notes in his commentary of these verses, that it is
worth noting that the last thing that occurs before Jesus (as) supposedly “breathes his
last” is the drinking of the sponge with vinegar. Although the time between the drinking
of the vinegar and the loud cry is not allured to in the Passion narrative the question that
Ahmad asks is: what was in this drink? was it meant to expedite death or perform
another function such as sedation? From a medical perspective, the fact that Jesus (as)
was able to ingest and possibly tolerate the drink, confirms that Jesus (as) was
dehydrated to an extent that his ‘thirst centre’ in his hypothalmus was still functioning.
Jesus (as) was able to tolerate (not vomit) the drink, suggesting that his level of
dehydration may not have been ‘terminal’ (severe). It is of interest that loss of osmotic
thirst has been reported in the medical literature in patients with multiple system
atrophy. (Bevilacqua et al 1994) Thus, the natural inference to be drawn from the fact
that Jesus drank the vinegar was that he was not in the last minutes of death. Most
‘palliative’ patients reduce their intake or stop completely long before they die. (Emanuel
et al 1999) This has also been my own personal experience managing ‘palliative’
patients towards the end of life. Furthermore, in the last hours of life, weakness and
decreased neurological function frequently impair a patient’s ability to swallow. From the
Passion narrative there is no indication that Jesus’(as) gag reflex or reflexive clearing of
the oropharynx had declined. We commonly see ‘palliative’ patients accumulating a
build-up of saliva and oropharyngeal secretions which lead to gurgling, crackling, or
rattling sounds with each breath (known as the “death rattle”). Although we cannot
presume this did not occur, the lack of mention of the choking of Jesus (as) after taking
the drink, suggests that either it was not deemed important to mention or that he was
not in the last minutes or even hours of death.

John 19:

28. After this Jesus, having known that now all has been completed, to fulfil the
scripture said: “I thirst.”

Interestingly, John’s account differs in that Jesus makes no desperate cry. Ahmad
(2003) points out that some Christian commentators state that he supposedly fulfils
some Old Testament scripture by saying “I thirst”. However, if the Passion narrative is
taken at face value, Jesus of Nazareth (as) was thirsty in supposedly the last minutes of
life, which as discussed previously goes against what is commonly seen towards the
end of life in Palliative patients. Zugibe (2005) states that when Jesus said “I thirst” this
indicates that he was deprived of liquids since his last meal- which was ‘the last supper’,
and thus was indicative of a severe state of ‘hypovolaemic shock’ as a precursor to his
imminent death. In response, the question that arises is what evidence is there to say
Jesus(as) did not have any fluids after the last supper which was on the Wednesday. Is
Zugibe insinuating that Jesus (as) decided to partake in a ritual fast (refraining from fluid
and solid intake) after the last supper? If so why was there no mention of this in the
Passion narrative. Zugibe (2005) essentially states that Jesus of Nazareth (as) walked
from the location of the last supper (on the Wednesday) to the garden of gethsemane
through the desert and refrained from any fluid intake. Again a lack of evidence enables
one to conclude that this is simply conjecture on the part of Zugibe.

‘Hypovolaemic shock’ in itself is a clinical state in which loss of blood or plasma causes
inadequate tissue perfusion. The compensatory responses to haemorrhage (bleeding)
are categorised in the literature into: immediate, early and late. (Nolan 2014)
Nolan (2014) states that some early symptoms of hypovolaemic shock include the
following:

1. Confusion, aggression, drowsiness and coma (caused by cerebral hypoxia and

acidosis).
2. Tachypnoea (increased rate of breathing) (caused by hypoxia and acidosis).
3. General weakness (caused by hypoxia and acidosis).
4. Thirst (caused by hypovolaemia).
If we take the position of Zugibe (2005) with regard to ‘hypovolaemic shock’ as a cause
of death, and take Mark’s passion narrative as ‘gospel’, the broad classification of
‘hypovolaemic shock’ that Jesus (as) was in which causes thirst was class 2
(moderate). Jesus (as) then (according to Passion narrative) progressed to class 4
(severe) ‘hypovolaemic shock’ where the systolic pressure becomes unreadable
(precursor to death) extremely quickly. It is important to note that previously healthy,
young adults have remarkable compensatory capabilities and systolic pressure is often
preserved despite quite appreciable blood loss (1.5–2.0 L), according to Nolan (2014).
As we have no evidence to cite from the gospel accounts that Jesus was not a healthy
young adult, we can infer that such a quick progression between the stages of
hypovolaemic shock would seem unlikely. Furthermore, Retief & Cilliers (2003)
conclude that multi-organ failure (MOF) caused by circulatory collapse due to
‘hypovolaemic shock’ did not occur as Jesus of Nazareth (as) was not on the cross for
long enough.

The loud cry of Jesus of Nazareth (as)

Matthew 27:

50. And when Jesus cried out again in a loud voice, he yielded up his spirit.

Luke 23:

46. And Jesus, having cried out in a loud voice spoke: “Father, into Your hands I
present my spirit!” And having spoken this he breathed his last.

Ahmad (2003) notes that instead of having Jesus utter the cry of despair as Mark and
Matthew do, Luke’s account presents a more comfortable and peaceful saying in the
mouth of Jesus (as). Furthermore the lack of mention of a desperate cry (as in Mark),
gives rise to a presentation which is incongruent to the usual pattern of observed
behaviour of patients in the last minutes of death. During the terminal phases, many
family members fear that pain increases as the patient dies, however there is no
medical evidence to suggest this occurs. (Emanuel et al 1999) In fact in palliative
patients restlessness, agitation, moaning, and groaning accompany terminal delirium
(acute confusional state) immediately before death, and so the Passion narrative
(particularly Luke’s version) suggests that Jesus (as) was not in the last minutes, let
alone hours of death.

Interestingly, Zugibe (2005) also suggests ‘traumatic shock’ due to severe pain as a
potential cause of death for Jesus of Nazareth. The author goes further to say that
Jesus experienced some of the worst pains ever experienced by a man. How an
objective scientist can make such a claim without evidence is unfathomable. Death after
trauma is often attributable to multiple-organ failure (MOF) caused by the many
metabolic changes that occur after massive injury, the most important of which have
been grouped together as the ‘systemic inflammatory response syndrome’ and
subsequent ‘disseminated intravascular coagulation’ (DIC). (Hardaway 2006) DIC as
the term suggests promotes coagulation with subsequent microclots occluding the
microcirculation of any and all organs and in turn may lead to MOF. This would
evidently contradict the passion narrative passages related to blood flow after the
piercing of the body of Jesus by the soldiers.

Jesus’s (as) side ‘pierced’

John 19:

31. Therefore the Jews, as it was [the day] of preparation, in order that the bodies do
not remain on the cross on the Sabbath, for that Sabbath was the high day, they asked
Pilate that their legs may be broken and they be taken away.

32. So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first and the other who was crucified
with him.

33. But when they came to Jesus, they saw he has already died, they broke not his
legs,

34. but one of the soldiers pierced his side with a lance, and immediately blood and
water came out.

According to the above narrative, the Jews requested Pilate to have the criminals’ legs
broken. Historically, the practice of breaking the legs (one or both) with a blunt
implement, was the commonest method of ensuring death following the premature
disruption of the crucifixion. (Hass 1970) Interestingly, this was not done to Jesus(as).
According to John, one of the soldiers pricked/ pierced his side. Ahmad (2003) notes on
his analysis of the greek new testament lexicon that the fact that the word ἔνυξεν
(enusen) – Verb, aorist active indicative, 1st person singular of Νυσσω (nusso)
meaning: to prick, stab or pierce is used in the narrative, indicates that it was not a
major stabbing of the spear, but just a prick. This act was to test whether Jesus was
dead or simply faking death rather than to actually kill Jesus. Ahmad (2003) argues
logically that it would have made more sense for the soldier to thrust it into Jesus’ front,
straight through the heart, rather than the side which may not have caused death. Most
Christian medical writers such as Zugibe (2005) assume that the spear was thrust to the
upper abdomen or chest with the aim to perforate of the heart — probably the right
atrium or ventricle, immediately behind the sternum. (Retief & Cilliers 2003)
The Passion narrative however contradicts this assumption, and furthermore the
specific side of the chest that was pierced is not specified. Zugibe (2005) even suggests
that Jesus’s heart may have been compressed against the vertebral column, however
the narrative does not suggest the spear was thrust anterior-posteriorly.

The breaking of the tibia(s), (and possibly fibula(s)) of the lower leg(s) (crurifragium)
was known in Roman times to cause rapid death. [citation?] In fact this method was
indeed also used in antiquity as a primary mode of execution, outside crucifixion.
[citation?]
According to the Christian apologists, the reason why the legs of Jesus (as) were not
broken was due to the fulfilment of scripture: “Many are the afflictions of the righteous;
but the LORD delivers him out of them all. He keeps all his bones; not one of them is
broken” (Psalms 34:19-20). However as Ahmad (2003) notes, these authors only refer
to verse 20 of Psalms and neglect to mention the previous verse which states that God
delivers the righteous from all of the afflictions, i.e. God would save Jesus from death on
the cross.

Zugibe (2005) suggests the possibility of ‘pericardial rupture’ caused again by the spear.
The anatomic location of the heart within the thorax and the angle of the insertion of the
spear determines whether this injury occurred in the case of Jesus (as). In the medical
literature, several prognostic factors have been identified for survival in patients with
stab wounds to the heart: (i) mechanism of injury, i.e. gunshot versus stab wound (ii)
location of injury, i.e. right versus left ventricle, (iii) complexity of injury, i.e. single-
chamber versus multi-chamber and/or intra-pericardial great vessel injury including
aortic injury. (Maegele et al 2006) Naturally the passion narrative details do not allow
one to objectively hypothesise whether this injury occurred in the case of Jesus (as).

Ahmad (2003), noted that it is important contextually to highlight that it was dark (Mark
15:33) at the time of the event. Thus, the likelihood of eyewitnesses being able to see
blood and water separately, whilst standing a few metres away in the dark with just
torch lights, is relatively slim. Kersten (1995) interestingly suggests that the author of
John was using the expression “blood and water” metaphorically to express the fact that
a large volume of blood came out of Jesus’s side after the piercing. Nevertheless, if we
assume the Passion narrative is accurate when describing the immediate blood loss
after being pricked, this has been stated by most non-Christian apologists as
evidence that Jesus was alive at this point in the narrative.

This has been countered by Zugibe (2005) who states that blood can flow from the
wounds of a dead person. Unfortunately the author provides only personal experience
(anecdotal) evidence for such a claim which from an analytical perspective is the lowest
form of evidence. It is true that once the heart stops beating, blood collects in the most
dependent parts of the body (livor mortis), the body stiffens (rigor mortis) and the body
begins to cool (algor mortis).

The blood in the case of a dead Jesus (as) would have quickly settled in the lower limbs
(closest to the ground). Within minutes to hours after death, the skin of the most
dependent body parts is discolored (purple-red) by livor mortis, or what embalmers call
"postmortem stain". If we take the passion narrative as authentic, and Zugibe’s
interpretation as accurate (that Jesus was already dead), one must assume that Jesus
(as) had died moments before the piercing of his side, which contradicts Zugibe’s
(2005) own position that Jesus (as) was on the cross for 6 hours and was probably
dead for 3 hours. [Does Zugibe actually state that Jesus a.s. was dead for 3 hours
before being pierced? Would the page numbers not be helpful in such citations?]

Zugibe (2005) further states that blood commonly appears ‘un-clotted’ in most
individuals who die violently (RTAs, homicides) because of an increase in
‘thrombolysins’. Unfortunately he provided no evidence base for this claim despite the
fact that it contradicts the commonly held view that after a few hours, the pooled blood
in cadavers becomes "fixed" and will not move. (Iserson 2002) It is well known that
post-mortem blood is largely coagulated, appearing clot-like, or may consist mainly of
thrombus-like formations. In rare cases it is almost entirely liquid. This variability of post-
mortem blood has been postulated to be due to the activation of the fibrinolytic system
prior to or immediately after death, however it is noted that mostly after death, blood is
largely coagulated. (Malone PC & Agutter 2008)

Hazrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad (ra), the fourth Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community,
wrote: “As far as the mention of water is concerned it should not be surprising for Jesus
(as) to have developed ‘pleurisy’ during the extremely exacting and punishing hours of
trial that he spent upon the cross. Also, the stress of the crucifixion could have resulted
in exudates from the pleura to collect like bags of water, which is medically termed as
wet pleurisy” (Ahmad 1997) Thus the “water” signified the draining of a pleural effusion
(fluid that accumulated in the fluid-filled space surrounding the lungs and the “blood” from the
possible accumulation of blood in the pleural cavity (‘haemothorax’). Interestingly, John
Hunter in 1794, advocated the early creation of an intercostal incision for the
drainage of a haemothorax. Did the piercing of Jesus’s (as) side lead to the
early evacuation of a small haemothorax, enabling Jesus’s lung to re-inflate?
Based on the details of Passion narrative, there is not enough detail to
confirm or deny such a hypothesis.

The “immediate” flow of blood after the ‘piercing’ of Jesus’s (as) side, rather than a
“passive” oozing of blood, has been cited as evidence of ‘signs of life’ at that moment. It
is important to highlight that one cannot assume that the act of piercing his side and the
observation that followed (as documented in the passion narrative) is an indication of
death as there is no evidence that this was the commonly used method of confirming
death in Roman times. In the fifth century bc, Hippocrates stated that, although the
diagnosis of death was not specifically the task of the physician, a lack of pulse and
breathing were irrefutable signs of death. Since Galen’s time there were concerns of
conditions that could mimic death. In summary, from ancient times to the first half of the
twentieth century, the diagnosis of death was exclusively based on cardiorespiratory
criteria. However the subsequent substantial technical advances took place that helped
certify death, prevent premature burial, and restore life whenever this was possible.
(Novitzky D & Cooper D.K.C. 2013) [Is it possible to give dates as to precisely when
such advances in medical science occurred? And assuming you’ve read my article, is
there anything in it which is questionable as regards medical issues, including history of
medical advances?]
Some Christian authors, have claimed that Roman soldiers were ‘experts’ at confirming
death, however neglect the fact that even with modern medical equipment and
technological advances, there are regularly widely publicised cases of mistaken death
confirmation and or certification. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7419652.stm)

Furthermore, from my own personal experience (and the experience of my colleagues)

there is often considerable doubt about the actual moment of death, particularly when
witnessing the process of dying, due to persistent warmth of a dead body and the long
intervals between respiratory gasps which can be misleading. (Charlton 2012).

Wilkinson (1975) along with other theologians have described the incident of ‘blood and
water’ as being difficult to explain medically due to the lack of detail in the description of
the event. In conclusion although both Christian medical authors and non-Christian
authors may be able to provide evidence for their respective claims, the exact medical
diagnosis of the blood and water remains in doubt due to the lack of precise medical
information pertaining to this incident in the Passion narrative.

Conclusion

The analysis of the clinical literature pertaining to the crucifixion of Jesus (as) of
Nazareth by Maslen & Mitchel (2006), suggests that there has been “suboptimal use of
these historical sources in publications with the vast majority of articles not referring to
texts in the original languages that describe the details of crucifixion, which are mostly in
Latin and Greek.” They further state that there is occasional reference to the few Roman
period texts that have been published in English translation and the medical writers
quote previous publications by other medical authors for their historical information.

The nine suggested theories (table 1) suggested by medical practitioners of various

specialities at first glance appear plausible. However, the question as to whether the
causes of death are substantiated by medical research, historical (Passion narrative)
and archaeological authenticity is questionable . Many of the written sources used by
the Christian medical authors are English translations, which brings into question the
accuracy of interpretations.

Without precise human re-enactment research, it is futile to present a cause of death for
an event that is not clearly documented in authentic primary historical sources. In
conclusion there is insufficient evidence to safely conclude that Jesus of Nazareth (as)
died on the cross. Furthermore the medical authors that have determined the exact
cause of death of Jesus (as) of Nazareth do so without much historical evidence from
Roman times. It is likely that Jesus of Nazareth (as) was a fit man in his early thirties
when he was placed on the cross, and so was likely to have had the necessary
compensatory mechanisms to resist premature death caused by the short duration
crucifixion that he endured. In usual crucifixion cases (where victims were placed on the
cross for several days) the main cause of death would [or might? We can only speculate
as crucifixions are no longer carried out in our times in such a way that adequate
research can be carried out on them] have been asphyxiation from severely hampered
respiration with secondary cardiovascular collapse. (What do you think of my
speculation that dehydration might be a significant factor, given the number of days it
took to die from crucifixion tallying with the number of days it takes for dehydration to
cause death, suggesting that other factors are not really that significant?] The hanging
from the arms would [might?] have made respiratory expiration very difficult with
resultant asphyxiation inevitable. From the Passion narrative, the case of Jesus of
Nazareth (as) was not usual in that the length of time that he was placed on the cross
was shorter.

Until new archaeological or textual evidence comes to light then it is only through more
realistic humane re-enactment research that we may actually be able to firmly answer
whether Jesus of Nazareth (as) survived the crucifixion or died on the cross. From the
passion narrative descriptions of Jesus of Nazareth (as) appearing in the flesh with
wounds after the crucifixion event, it is more probable and logical from a scientific
perspective that Jesus of Nazareth (as) did not die on the cross, and actually survived
the ordeal in a state of swoon. It is quite remarkable that the Christian medical authors
propose various hypotheses for his alleged death, often citing medical evidence to
support their claims, to outright deny the very real and logical possibility based on the
gospel accounts of his survival. Their reasoning is often based on their doubts
regarding the likelihood of Jesus (as) surviving the ordeal of crucifixion. These very
same authors have no qualms in “believing” (without scientific evidence) that Jesus (as)
rose from the dead ( an even more unlikely event in terms of scientific probability) into a
‘supernatural’ body that needed food, water, clothing (eventually being mistaken for a
gardener) who subsequently ascended to the father. When taking the passion narrative
holistically, a more congruent and logical scientific position would be that Jesus of
Nazareth (as) surviving the crucifixion (with the help of his spiritual conviction and belief
in his Creator), recovering with the help of his closest disciples and continuing his
ministry as a human being devoted to God, in search of the ‘lost sheep’ of the house of
Israel.
References:

Ahmad S (2003) A Muslim Commentary of the Bible.

Ahmad ,Hazrat Mirza Tahir (1997) Christianity, a Journey from Facts to Fiction, p.72.
Islam International Publications.

Bevilacqua M, Norbiata G, Righini V et al (1994) Loss of osmotic thirst in multiple

system atrophy: association with sinoaortic baroreceptor deafferentation. American
Journal of Physiology 266: 1752-8.

Charlton R (2012). Confirming death in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. Nov; 62(604): 572–
573

Crook, Z. (2012), Crucifixion in Antiquity – By Gunnar Samuelsson. Religious Studies

Review, 38: 95. doi:10.1111/j.1748-0922.2012.01601_8.x

Dewey, A(2016) The memorable invention of the death of Jesus

HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, 07/08/2016, Vol.72(4)
Emanuel LL, von Gunten CF, Ferris FD (1999) The Education for Physicians on End-of-
life Care (EPEC) curriculum,

Haas N. Anthropomorphic observations in skeletal remains from Giv’at ha-Mivtar. Israeli

Exploration Journal 1970; 20: 38-59

HARDAWAY, R.M., 2006. Traumatic Shock. Military medicine, 171(4), pp. 278-9.

Holoubek, J.E. & Holoubek, A.B., 1995. Execution by crucifixion. History, methods and
cause of death. J.Med., 26(1–2), pp.1–16.

Iserson, Kenneth V (2002) Death to Dust: What Happens to Dead Bodies? 2nd
edition.Tucson, AZ: Galen Press, 2001.

Kersten H (1995) The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud & The Truth About The
Resurrection, p.251 Element Books Ltd

Kissane RW & Rose S (1961) Traumatic pericarditis. The American Journal of

Cardiology. Jan 1961 Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages 97–101

Maegele M, Andreas Harzheim, Ulrich Hagn, Toni Steinbuechel, Stefan Trojan, Stefan
Saad (2006) Stab wound to the heart: A pictorial report and short review of the
literature, European Journal of Radiology Extra, Volume 60, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 105-
108

Malone PC & Agutter (2008) The Aetiology of Deep Venous Thrombosis A Critical,
Historical and Epistemological Survey. Chapter 13. Cadaver Clots or Agonal Thrombi?

Maslen MW & Mitchell PD.,2006. Medical theories on the cause of death in crucifixion J
R Soc Med 2006;99:185–188

Nolan Jerry P (2014), Pullinger Rick. Hypovolaemic Shock BMJ 2014; 348 :bmj.g1139

Novitzky D & Cooper D.K.C. (2013) The Brain-Dead Organ Donor: Pathophysiology and
Management, chapter 2 (Historical Aspects of the Diagnosis of Death by Félix Bacigalupo and
Daniela A. Huerta Fernández) 7 DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-4304-9_2, © Springer
Science+Business Media New York 2013

Retief, F.P. & Cilliers, L., 2003. The history and pathology of crucifixion. South African
Medical Journal, 93(12 I), pp.938–941.
Seneca LA. In: Michaelis HC, ed. De Consolatione ad Marciam. Harlem: Vincent
Loosjes, 1840

Wilkinson, J. (1975). The Incident of the Blood and Water in John 19.34. Scottish
Journal of Theology, 28(2), 149-172. doi:10.1017/S0036930600034876

Zugibe FT. The Crucifixion of Jesus: a Forensic Enquiry. New York: M

Evans, 2005