What is it with JW's and the Cross? (page 3)

Caminante

JunkYardDog: here's all the occurences of the word "cross" in the 1946 edition, check them in your printed version (I have a scanned, OCR'd version of it; pretty high quality):

1) page 34 - Philippians 2:8 according to the American Standard Version
2) page 37 - same verse according to the Emphatic Diaglott
3) page 135 - quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia about image worship
4) page 164 - Colossians 2:12-18 quoted from an unspecified Bible translation (probably KJV)
5) page 171 - Ephesians 2:16 quoted from Goodspeed's translation.
6) page 204 - the same scripture in Colossians according to Goodspeed

JunkYardDog

caminarte; you are correct on page 37 they do quote the Emphatic Diaglatt saying " he (jesus) humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death of the CROSS" I read the next few pages and they never say that Jesus don't die on a cross. the way I read it is that the wts are agreeing that Jesus died on a cross. of course the wt plays with words I get the feeling they start with the term cross to keep the reader /new convert interested then switch it to tree a few pages later. But the fact is still there in the 1946 edition they are still saying jesus died on a CRoss and they are using a respected bible authority to back up thier claim for what it's worth

Caminante

Yes, back then they didn't stumble on the words ... I mean they knew that all of the Bible translations they were translating staurós as cross, but they didn't mind that, since they repeatedly depicted Jesus as being nailed on a piece of vertical timber, and believed the cross to be a crux simplex. Evidently the minds of the Witnesses back then were tuned accordingly, and weren't surprised to see Bible verses saying something, and the text saying something else. Besided the occurence on page 43, check "tree" on pages 114, 164, 171, 174, 175, 203, 247, 290, where it is used in connection with Jesus' crucifixion.

JunkYardDog

caminarte: on page 135 there is no reference that jesus didn't die on a CROSS only that it's a symbol that the catholic church uses as well of painting and statues. I see nothing here that the wt says that jesus didn't die on a cross. In essence the wts is claiming jesus died on a cross but crying about idol worship. Ill read the next few pages you posted and see how the wts twists all this

JunkYardDog

My whole point of answering this thread was that the wts says today they were firm on the belief in 1936 or earlier that jesus DIDN'T DIE ON A CROSS. it doesn't matter in this book how much the wt talks about IDOL WORSHIP etc. I clearly see were the wts is going with this stuff even back in 1946. same old song and dance. the wts still printed in this book that jesus DIED ON A CROSS. that was my point any way you twist it. enjoy your night

JunkYardDog

I'll wait for you to show me in "let god be true" were the wts said Jesus died on a torture stake and not a cross. Maybe I missed something? till then the book goes back into the basement. till the jw's come knocking

FloridaPerry

"JWs: "The cross is a pagan, phallic symbol."

I've heard my mother talk about "phallic" symbols when we drive by a church. It's like all these people are children of Satan, wanting to advance Lucifer's will and Jehovah's Witnesses are the only people standing in his way. All these people are against Jehovah's Witnesses because they know that they are trying to bring truth into the world and they want the ways of Satan to prevail. In fact, in the life I have lived, the best people that I have met were hardly aware of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Heaven

What I find rather hilarious is their graphical depiction of Christ on the torture 'stake' and the fact that it is scripturally inaccurate. Shows just how much the WTS knows about the Bible.

zombie dub

haha tis funny

how is a cross more phallic than a stake, I think a straight stake looks far more phallic?

it's so obvious it couldn't have been a stake as supposedly Jesus and then someone else (one man) carried it for a mile, it would have been at least 14-15 foot long, it would have taken 6 people to carry wood that heavy for that distance. The whole carrying story only works with a cross beam used in a........ cross!

Think About It

how is a cross more phallic than a stake, I think a straight stake looks far more phallic?

it's so obvious it couldn't have been a stake as supposedly Jesus and then someone else (one man) carried it for a mile, it would have been at least 14-15 foot long, it would have taken 6 people to carry wood that heavy for that distance. The whole carrying story only works with a cross beam used in a........ cross!

BINGO.

Think About It

What is it with JW's and the Cross?

Share this