PROOF JESUS DIED ON A CROSS

by Mary 33 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Dansk

  Hi Didier:

  Ian,

  I personally take the sentence "Jesus died on a cross" as meaning "the Gospel Passion stories have Jesus dying on a cross" -- it's about understanding a narrative, not deciding historicity.

  I fully understand that. It went through my head at the time, i.e. "If it could be proven the Romans crucified by using a cross rather than a stake, then this would mean Jesus died on a cross." But the thread title consists of the word 'PROOF' and it was from this angle that I asked my questions. Ian
• 

  Mary

  I fully understand that. It went through my head at the time, i.e. "If it could be proven the Romans crucified by using a cross rather than a stake, then this would mean Jesus died on a cross." But the thread title consists of the word 'PROOF' and it was from this angle that I asked my questions.

  Sorry Ian----I should have given this thread a different title......I didn't want the thread to be an argument as to whether or not Jesus ever existed----that's another subject completely. This thread is going with the assumption that he did exist.
• 

  Dansk

  Mary:

  Sorry Ian----I should have given this thread a different title......I didn't want the thread to be an argument as to whether or not Jesus ever existed----that's another subject completely. This thread is going with the assumption that he did exist.

  I should be apologising to YOU! I inadvertantly (almost) hijacked your thread. (((((((((((((())))))))))))))

  Ian
• 

  hampstead

  I once showed a JW a picture of jesus on the 'stake' , not cross, taken from one of the watchtowers publications. The interesting thing was that it WAS a cross. The reason was that the drawing has jesus on a pole, but as popular belief goes, the romans would also affix a piece of wood or the like ACCROSS the pole announcing the name of the criminal and his offense. So, from that point of view, the pole was actually visible AS A CROSS. I was thinking that perhaps this might give some insight as to how this whole thing started in the first place!!!
• 

  Witchettygrub

  Mary great work/info, To think I once droned on in morbid detail about how Jesus died on a stake. As the Romans were pagan it's pretty obvious a cross would have been used! Witchettygrub
• 

  AuldSoul

  There is ample proof in the Bible itself that Jesus died on a "Christian" cross and not on a crux simplex (in deference to Ian I hasten to add, assmuing Jesus existed ).

  (1) The length of time required for mortality for a person executed in the manner reportedly used with Jesus required the breaking of the legs of the other two men being executed, which meant they were still alive. As shown in Mary's analysis, this would have been impossible for a person sound in body after 30 minutes on a crux simplex. The fact that the soldiers intended to have to do this to hasten death shows that they expected the condemned to still be alive.

  (2) Thomas, who would have known exactly what the instrument of execution looked like, twice used the plural form "nails" when referring to the print in the hands of Jesus. A crux simplex only required the use of one nail through both hands. Given the size of the nails in question, it is unreasonable to imagine two nails through crossed hands above the head. There simply isn't room, even with fairly large hands.

  But the funniest part of it to me is the JW retort regarding the pagan-ness of the symbology in the "Christian" cross. The upright pole is a ubiquitous symbol of male phalli and male fertility throughout pagan civilizations. I am not aware of a single exception to that rule, whatever other symbols might also be present in the pagan culture to represent male fertility. Even in modern-day hedonistic milieux, like erotica clubs, one finds the upright pole being used symbolically as a phallus. It is certainly the oldest symbolic representation of male fertility.

  The thought that a pagan culture (one that delighted in both physical and psychological torments for convicted criminals) would not use pagan symbology in its executions is laughable.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Mary

  Dansk said: I should be apologising to YOU! I inadvertantly (almost) hijacked your thread.

  Geeze, I dunno Ian....you don't sound very repentent.....I think we're gonna have to form a judicial committee to get to the bottom of this. LOL!! And you certainly don't have to apologize......

  hamstead said: I once showed a JW a picture of jesus on the 'stake' , not cross, taken from one of the watchtowers publications. The interesting thing was that it WAS a cross. The reason was that the drawing has jesus on a pole, but as popular belief goes, the romans would also affix a piece of wood or the like ACCROSS the pole announcing the name of the criminal and his offense. So, from that point of view, the pole was actually visible AS A CROSS.

  The Witnesses are partially right. While most movies always depict Jesus carrying a cross through the streets on the way to Golgatha, this is not what would have happened. He would have been carrying a single piece of wood that was fixed to another piece of wood when they got to the execution place as the following article from Biblical Archaeology Review (BAR Jan-Feb 1985) shows:

  During this early period, a wooden beam, known as a furca or patibulum was placed on the slave?s neck and bound to his arms. The slave was then required to march through the neighborhood proclaiming his offense. This march was intended as an expiation and humiliation. Later, the slave was also stripped and scourged, increasing both the punishment and the humiliation. Still later, instead of walking with his arms tied to the wooden beam, the slave was tied to a vertical stake................A soldier at the head of the procession carried the titulus, an inscription written on wood, which stated the defendant?s name and the crime for which he had been condemned. Later, this titulus was fastened to the victim?s cross. When the procession arrived at the execution site, a vertical stake was fixed into the ground. Sometimes the victim was attached to the cross only with ropes. In such a case, the patibulum or crossbeam, to which the victim?s arms were already bound, was simply affixed to the vertical beam; the victim?s feet were then bound to the stake with a few turns of the rope.......If the victim was attached by nails, he was laid on the ground, with his shoulders on the crossbeam. His arms were held out and nailed to the two ends of the crossbeam, which was then raised and fixed on top of the vertical beam.

  Accounts of the suppression of the revolt of Spartacus in 71 B.C. tell how the Roman army lined the road from Capua to Rome with 6,000 crucified rebels on 6,000 crosses. After the Romans quelled the relatively minor rebellion in Judea in 7 A.D. triggered by the death of King Herod, Quintilius Varus, the Roman Legate of Syria, crucified 2,000 Jews in Jerusalem. During Titus?s siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., Roman troops crucified as many as 500 Jews a day for several months.

  AuldSoul said: But the funniest part of it to me is the JW retort regarding the pagan-ness of the symbology in the "Christian" cross. The upright pole is a ubiquitous symbol of male phalli and male fertility throughout pagan civilizations. I am not aware of a single exception to that rule, whatever other symbols might also be present in the pagan culture to represent male fertility. Even in modern-day hedonistic milieux, like erotica clubs, one finds the upright pole being used symbolically as a phallus. It is certainly the oldest symbolic representation of male fertility.

  Excellent point! I never even thought of that!!
• 

  AuldSoul

  Mary,

  IMO, changing the discussion to the pagan symbology of the upright pole is the easiest way to completely flummox a JW on this issue.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  brutusmaximus

  Sparticus died on a cross along with hundreds of others so the cross thing must be true

  At the end of the day though the poor guy went through severe agony (if you believe in him, Ian) so does it really matter what he died on? I have just thought about that and I suppose it does as once again it proves false hoods in the WTS doctrine

  BM
• 

  Narkissos

  BM

  does it really matter what he died on?

  One funny thing is that the WT can make exactly the same argument when they need to, cf. Watchtower 4/1, 1984, QFR (my comments in red):

  Is

  itcorrecttoconcludefromJohn20:25thatJesuswasimpaledwithaseparatenailthrougheachhand?

  The CyclopaediaofBiblical,Theological,andEcclesiasticalLiterature, by M?Clintock and Strong, comments:

  ?Much time and trouble have been wasted in disputing as to whether three or four nails (note: never two!) were used in fastening the Lord. Nonnus affirms that three only were used, in which he is followed by Gregory Nazianzen. The more general belief gives four nails, an opinion which is supported at much length and by curious arguments by Curtius. Others have carried the number of nails as high as fourteen.??Volume II, page 580.

  Matthew 27:35 merely says: "When they had impaled him they distributed his outer garments by casting lots." Little detail is given, as in Mark, Luke and John. After Jesus? resurrection, Thomas said: "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe." (John 20:25) So even though criminals sometimes were bound to a stake with ropes, Jesus was nailed. Some have also concluded from John 20:25 that two nails were used, one through each hand. But does Thomas? use of the plural (nails) have to be understood as a precise description indicating that each of Jesus? hands was pierced by a separate nail?

  In Luke 24:39 the resurrected Jesus said: "See my hands andmyfeet, that it is I myself." This suggests that Christ?s feet also were nailed. Since Thomas made no mention of nailprints in Jesus? feet, his use of the plural "nails" could have been a general reference to multiple nails used in impaling Jesus (iow, the "nails in his hands" may have been from one hand nail and one foot nail?).

  Thus, it just is not possible at this point to state with certainty how many nails were used. Any drawings of Jesus on the stake should be understood as artists? productions that offer merely a representation based on the limited facts that we have. Debate over such an insignificant detail should not be permitted to becloud the all-important truth that "we became reconciled to God through the death of his Son." (but, on the other hand -- if I dare say -- if you believe he died on a cross instead of a stake you're not reconciled at all...) ?Romans 5:10.