• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Cross or Upright Stake

cataway

Well-Known Member
I see that you do not know how words work. Yes, the original crucifixions may have been done on a stake. That does not mean that Jesus was crucified that way. It is known that the crossbar for a tau cross was added later, but because there already was a term for a "cross" they would not have changed that. So this argument does not really help you at all.
its apparent you have little or no experience standing poles or for that matter a pole with a cross bar.
then consider ,put a man on to it and it becomes a good deal more difficult .
considering the roman's were at least as clever as I am on how to stand and how to get up and out of the hole the thing sets in . ok sure
you read about it maybe watch a movie is nothing compared to the experience of doing it .one slip and gravity will kick your butt
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
its apparent you have little or no experience standing poles or for that matter a pole with a cross bar.
then consider ,put a man on to it and it becomes a good deal more difficult .
considering the roman's were at least as clever as I am on how to stand and how to get up and out of the hole the thing sets in . ok sure
you read about it maybe watch a movie is nothing compared to the experience of doing it .one slip and gravity will kick your butt
A pole in just a hole will tend to wobble a bit. Now you may have had modern tools that quickly dig a nice circular hole for you that matches a standard sized pole. They would not have had such a tool in those days. Even a manual post hole digger is above what they would have had back then. Try digging a hole with a spade and then putting a post in it.

As usual you cannot support any of your claims with reliable sources. Britannica tells us that the man carried the cross piece to the site and was attached to it and then it was raised to a fixed poll. If the pole had a mortise in the wood the man could be easily lifted by a team and then that cross piece could be secured using either rope or nails:


Wikipedia has pretty much the same information, though they do point out that sometimes a simple pole was used and that had the term "crux simplex". But they also have this quote from a Roman of that time:

"In the Roman Empire, the gibbet (instrument of execution) for crucifixions took on many shapes. Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BCE–65 CE) states: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet."[14] According to Josephus, during Emperor Titus's Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE), Roman soldiers nailed innumerable Jewish captives to crosses in various ways.[2]"


If you want to claim that they definitely crucified him on a simple pole the burden of proof is upon you. It appears that most historians that studied this think that he was forced to carry the cross piece, that he was attached to that and then he was raised up and that was attached by some means to a permanent pole.
 

cataway

Well-Known Member
A pole in just a hole will tend to wobble a bit. Now you may have had modern tools that quickly dig a nice circular hole for you that matches a standard sized pole. They would not have had such a tool in those days. Even a manual post hole digger is above what they would have had back then. Try digging a hole with a spade and then putting a post in it.

As usual you cannot support any of your claims with reliable sources. Britannica tells us that the man carried the cross piece to the site and was attached to it and then it was raised to a fixed poll. If the pole had a mortise in the wood the man could be easily lifted by a team and then that cross piece could be secured using either rope or nails:


Wikipedia has pretty much the same information, though they do point out that sometimes a simple pole was used and that had the term "crux simplex". But they also have this quote from a Roman of that time:

"In the Roman Empire, the gibbet (instrument of execution) for crucifixions took on many shapes. Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BCE–65 CE) states: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet."[14] According to Josephus, during Emperor Titus's Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE), Roman soldiers nailed innumerable Jewish captives to crosses in various ways.[2]"


If you want to claim that they definitely crucified him on a simple pole the burden of proof is upon you. It appears that most historians that studied this think that he was forced to carry the cross piece, that he was attached to that and then he was raised up and that was attached by some means to a permanent pole.
you are only showing what you don't know .I infact have stood poles .if need be a wedge of wood on 3 sides will hold a pole upright.
the proof of how it was done is in the Forensic clues you will find if you do a honest look. a person hung on a cross does not die from suffocation, but hung on a pole they do and die in a few hours after being hung up. its in the science ,look it up
 

cataway

Well-Known Member

John 19:31

Since it was the day of Preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the torture stakes on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath day was a great one), the Jews asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken away.''
evidently the Jews knew ,likely from experience of seeing others be hung up , that when the legs are broken it quickens death
 
Top