The main conclusion regarding the terminology of crucifixion is that there does not appear to be any terminology of crucifixion — before the death of Jesus. All the mentioned terms share a crucial feature: none of them can be determined to mean “to crucify” or “cross” — by themselves. If this conclusion is correct, the majority of scholars have used an unsatisfactory method in their process of text selection. It is better to let the absence of fixed terminology illuminate the absence of a fixed punishment.
In short, he spends much time demonstrating just how the NT descriptions (albeit brief and implied) have colored interpretations of many other texts and resulted in unwarranted assumptions.
He concludes that it is most likely that at least some NT writers had a cross shaped implement in mind from expressions like stretch out arms, sign above head, nails in hands, and likely the carrying of the patibulum. This plus the evidence that the cross shape was in use in the first century, despite the WT claims otherwise.
However, as PioneerSchmioneer points out he also concludes that the symbolism of death by suspension had greater theological significance that seems to have dominated the conversation for most writers.
