Easter is coming...so what IS up with Cross vs. Stake?

by lost_and_searching 11 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  lost_and_searching

  I was raised JW. I'm almost 42 (Birthday-April 8th!!!! YEAH!!!!!!) and my parents and only sibling (sister-15 years older than me) are still strong in the organization. There was always one question I wanted to ask.....but was afraid to. You know....afraid because I just didn't want to subject myself to the L-O-N-G lecture that would follow my question. :o)

  Anyway, where in the heck do the JWs come up with the idea that is was a Stake and not a Cross that Christ was crucified on? I have been asked so many times by other people (knowing that my ignorant-self was raised JW) where does the idea of the "Stake vs. Cross" come from? Where does the Society get this stuff???? I remember a bit from my youth....I was told that the Romans weren't even using the cross at that time, it was a straight stake, but I would love to find out WHERE to find this out for myself. Go figure........I think it would be cool to prove to myself that family is wrong on this point. (yeah, I know they are wrong on LOTS of points, but let's not go there right now. LOL)

  Thanks in advance for everyone's input! ~Bobbi
• 

  manon

  I believe that in the end the cross vs stake issue boils down to semantics.
• 

  OUTLAW

  I have it on good authority(Uncle Bruce)..Jesus dined on a steak.....OUTLAW
• 

  jgnat

  Here is my favorite research paper on the cross vs stake thing. I think it explains both sides very well. Be prepared for your family to tell you, "Oh well, cross....stake, does it really make a difference?"

  Well, Yes, especially if they use it as proof that the other churches are wrong, wrong, wrong.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/36340/1.ashx
• 

  DJ

  the cross vs. the stake.........a classic example of the way that the watchtower makes a big issue of of nothing. They fail to see the whole purpose of Christ's redemptive work at the CROSS therefore they need to cover over it with an argument about the tool that was used. They do this with so many scriptures that it makes me sick. One of the arguments that I remember was that people shouldn't have crosses because it was like "keeping a bullet that killed your son" and naturally no one would do that......What they failed to remember was thiat it PLEASED the father to bruise the son so that we could be saved (Romans?) through him. If the Father was happy to have the Son die for us then why is it wrong for us to be happy as well. Let me get this straight.......GOD will kill anyone who thinks that it might have been a cross instead of a stake, right? Paaaaaleeeeeze. Mountains out of molehills and arguements over the small things. Sort of like cleansing the outside of the cup while the inside is filthy, to me.
• 

  gumby

  If the story were true.....

  the fact that a sign was hung......"above his head.....and NOT his hands, should be enough to figure it out. The story that the Romans didn't use "a cross" is false. Even Josephus ( the 1st century historian that the society ALWAYS uses for refrences........spoke of that means as the execution that was used)

  Gumby
• 

  Nathan Natas

  So... do Dubs enjoy chcolate bunny on a stick (stauros)?
• 

  gumby

  A few more tidbits from your" uncle leonard"

  But was there a crucified Jesus? Certainly. Jesus ben Stada was a Judean agitator who gave the Romans a headache in the early years of the second century. He met his end in the town of Lydda (twenty five miles from Jerusalem) at the hands of a Roman crucifixion crew. And given the scale that Roman retribution could reach – at the height of the siege of Jerusalem the Romans were crucifying upwards of five hundred captives a day before the city walls – dead heroes called Jesus would (quite literally) have been thick on the ground. Not one merits a full-stop in the great universal history.

  Gumby

  Read a little about Josephus....we still HAVE his writings
• 

  Francois

  Actually, I prefer my chocolate bunny on a rope. That way I can hang it around my neck and munch on it as I see fit. When you've got one of your hands tied up with a bunny on a stick, you've gotta eat it as catch can, which is unfair both to the bunny and to me, not to mention the other drivers on the road.

  The ultimate, of course, is to have melted bunny IV drip direct into a vein while you're driving...or whatever.

  francois
• 

  gsx1138

  Let me start by saying I think the whole story is a myth. Although, it was common for the Romans to use torture stakes (ala WTS) they attached cross beams to them (Doh!). The Romans did call them torture stakes not crosses but the physical representation still looks like a cross. Thus, it's semantics.