Pierced Hand or Wrist?

Before I discuss this matter I want to say this is not a major issue but has some interesting repercussions. Also I want to say the conclusions that I am coming to are based on my understanding which may be flawed therefore let the Bible be your guide not cunningly devised arguments of myself or those who disagree with me.

First of all the text itself is never translated wrist in the Hebrew Old Testament (Ps 22:16) or the Greek New Testament. End of argument.

Secondly archaeologists find those who were crucified by Rome with piercings in both their hands and their wrists. So the argument that Jesus would have fallen off the cross if they had pierced his hands is ridiculous. The point is they did not HAVE to pierce the wrist to keep Him on the cross.

The repercussions of the wrist argument:
The Passover Lamb was not to have ANY broken bones. The Passover Lamb is an Old Testament picture of Christ being crucified for our sins to be our propitiation. The Jews take this so far even today that a knife blade is not to even knick the bone when preparing it for the festival.

The chances of breaking a bone by piercing the wrist is even greater than in the hand. Which flies in the face of the whole Passover service. But some would go on to say that Christ was not pierced in the wrist or the hand but in the forearm. They would argue that Roman thought was the hand included the whole area from the elbow to the hand. I am not sure where this information comes from but it would be worth finding out. Therefore Christ was actually pierced in His forearm. BUT even if that is true Romans didn't write Psalm 22:16 which talks about the hands being pierced. My major concern with this argument is how far up the arm are we going to go to make some point based on human understanding?

Bones are a picture in the Old Testament of strength. When David speaks of his bones being dried up it is the idea he has no more strength. The point of none of the Passover Lamb bones being broken is the idea that in all of Christ's sufferings He remained the omnipotent Creator. So if You break His bones in the wrist you essentially offend this picture.

When does hand mean hand? To those who follow the wrist argument everywhere except when talking about Jesus' piercing.

The subtle problem in the wrist argument is that we need modern doctors to tell us how the crucifixion really took place so it would work right. We can't let the Biblical text (or history) tell us we need those "omniscient" scientists to guide us in our understanding of the Bible and we miss the pictures that the Holy Spirit have been painting for so long.