Forensic and archaeological perspectives on the crucifixion of Jesus. The crucifixion of Jesus is a crucial aspect of the Christian faith, documented mainly in the Gospels of the New Testament. Although these texts are of a religious nature, the wider historical and archaeological context provides the opportunity to assess the credibility of crucifixion as a method of execution in the Roman Empire. Through the lens of forensic science, archeology, and historical analysis, this article scrutinizes the evidence of various practices related to crucifixion that have been documented since ancient times, from Rome to the 1st century AD. By synthesizing findings from multiple disciplines to assess the plausibility of the New Testament accounts of Jesus' death. …show more content…
What is the difference between a. and a. Historical background: • Roman Crucifixion Practices: Crucifixion was a common method of execution in the Roman Empire, used to punish slaves, rebels, and criminals. Historical records describe it as a brutal and public form of execution intended to serve as a deterrent. The method usually involved nailing or tying the condemned person to a wooden cross, resulting in death by asphyxiation, loss of blood and shock. Non-biblical historical sources:The writings of the Roman historian Tacitus (c. 116 AD) and the Jewish historian Josephus (c. 93-94 AD) provide external references to Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate. Tacitus, in his "Annals", mentions the execution of "Christ" by Pilate, while Joseph briefly refers to the crucifixion in his "Jewish Antiquities". These sources, although partly disputed, provide historical corroboration of the event. 2. What is the difference between a'smar Archaeological evidence