Cross vs. Stake: Does it REALLY friggin' matter?

Funchback

When did the WTS become so infatuated with the Cross vs. Stake theory? Did they come up with this theory in order to say, "See? We teach the truth!"

If the whole God-sends-son-to-earth-to-die-for-all-sins did actually happen, would almighty God or mighty Jesus care whether or not people said Jesus died with his arms extended or his his hands together? I mean, it's all so petty.

Jehovah: "Hmm! Listen, my son. My witnesses are teaching something false. They teach that you died on a cross."

Jesus: "Well, pops, why don't we send 'em some new light?"

Jehovah: "Good idea, son! Good idea..."

Jesus: "After all, it's more important that people know HOW I died rather than WHY I died."

Love_Truth

Yep, exactly.

Whether Christ died on a Cross or Stake is not important for our salvation. I don?t think there?s enough evidence one way or another to prove either. I don?t even have an opinion on it, other than that it?s not necessary for salvation.

Nosferatu

As far as I'm concerned, he died on a chunk of wood. Whether it be a stake, cross, tree, totem pole, or a 2x4, it doesn't really matter.

LyinEyes

Cross vs. Stake: Does it REALLY friggin' matter?

My sentiments exactly. The point of the Sacrifice is not the stake, the tree, or whatever, is it.......no.

But you know the WT,,,,,,,,,they have to be DIFFERENT.........that is why we had a friggin' green bible,,,,,,,,,an ugly green at that,,,,,,,and a hot pink song book. What in the world were they thinking, even in the 70's that was just tacky.

little witch

LOL With Dede

You are a gem babe. So funny.

No it doesnt matter a bit. They just had to come up with another example of "us vs. them"

Since all Christian Churches (babylon the great) believe that jesus was crucified (the very word means cross) what better dividing line?

Paul said "I preach only Christ Crucified",

What better way to deliniate between the troof and babylon?

Elsewhere

It DOES matter because the cross symbol was adopted from a pagan phallic symbol.

At least that's what the WTS says

*
*
*******
*
*
*
*
*

(Just looking at that makes me get all turned on and ready to jump an apostababe!!!)

Leolaia

To answer your first question of "when" (and no, it doesn't matter at all on what Jesus died on -- though the evidence clearly is not in the Society's favor):

According to the
1975 Yearbook the doctrine did not result from careful biblical analysis, but rather from Judge Rutherford's dislike of the cross symbol . Originally, the Bible Students under Charles T. Russell accepted the cross as a valid Christian emblem. In fact, Russell incorporated it in his symbol of the Millennial Kingdom ? a cross placed inside a crown. This "cross and crown" symbol appeared on Watchtower covers since 1891, and was represented on a plaque hanging in Russell's personal study. 1 The Bible Students even wore a pin of this shape. Carey W. Barber, now a member of the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses, described it: "It was a badge really, with a wreath of laurel leaves as the border and within the wreath was a crown with a cross running through it on an angle. It looked quite attractive and was our idea of what it meant to take up our ?cross? and follow Christ Jesus in order to be able to wear the crown of victory in due time." 2
Rutherford however did not think it was so "attractive." He perceived the cross as nothing more than a pagan symbol, as a long-time Witness recalled: "This to Brother Rutherford's mind was Babylonish and should be discontinued. He told us that when we went to the people's homes and began to talk,
that was the witness in itself." 3
It took Rutherford eight years to purge the Bible Students of the cross. His first move against it occurred in 1928, when he instructed his followers at a Detroit convention to discard the "objectionable" and "unnecessary" jewelry.
4 Then in 1931 the emblem was removed from the Watchtower covers. At that point the cross symbol became non-biblical, non-Christian, and ungodly ? and was relegated to the forbidden trappings of Satan's organization. The Witnesses however still believed that Jesus was executed on a traditional cross. This contradiction no doubt vexed Rutherford, and he saw the need to revise his assumptions about the Passion. Therefore, without much fanfare, he presented his new view in the book Riches . On page 27, he wrote: "Jesus was crucified, not on a cross of wood, such as exhibited in many images and pictures, and which images are made and exhibited by men; Jesus was crucified by nailing his body to a tree." 5 It seems that Rutherford saw nothing wrong (as does the Society today) with using the word "crucify" to denote impalement.
Therefore, according to the Society's own account, scholarship really had no-thing to do with its adoption of the "torture stake" doctrine.

benext

What is the source of the above quote please?

Leolaia

It is a research paper I wrote on the subject.

Valis

Does anyone have a pic or remember the slideshow special meeting they had many years ago about Watchtower history? Where they showed Russell's chuch w/the big ass cross on top? I remember the half laughter half something else response when they showed that one...

Sincerely,

District Overbeer

Cross vs. Stake: Does it REALLY friggin' matter?

Share this