A century or two isn't terribly long. It seems to me that the provided evidence is that the cross was a Christian symbol pretty much right from the beginning, even before there was any kind of Bible.
-
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!
Easter. What's with all the plastic eggs, chocolate rabbits & such?
- Thread starter jeager106
- Start date
A century or two isn't terribly long. It seems to me that the provided evidence is that the cross was a Christian symbol pretty much right from the beginning, even before there was any kind of Bible.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Can you show me where the cross was mentioned in the Bible as the instrument on which Christ was impaled?
Can you then show me where it says to make images of this cross and decorate our places of worship with them or to use them as jewellery? The apostasy that Jesus and his apostles foretold was already starting at the end of the first century. What happened after that was only the natural progression of that "falling away" from the teachings of the Christ.
Last edited:
Wait. Are you or are you not arguing that Jesus was put to death on a stake rather than something with a crossbeam? Because that's the only argument I'm making, or am even interested in. He's not my god, and I approach this from a purely scholarly point of view.
The Bible is irrelevant in this matter. Images that predate the Christian Bible have been demonstrated.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
I have as much proof for my argument as you do for yours. The Bible does not say "cross" and we had no TV reporters or people with mobile phones to record the event.
Christendom has an agenda when forcing the Bible to say "cross" when it doesn't.
The scholarly approach could well be tainted by the caliber of the scholars. After all, the Pharisees were considered the scholars of the Jewish system, but Jesus didn't endorse a word they said.
Regardless of the shape of the instrument.....God's word says no images of "anything" were to be used in our worship. For believers, THAT is the point.
Yes^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ intentions do matter.
It isn't the shape, it's what the shape means.
This sort of ideology is what I am trying to communicate in many of my posts about matters biblical.
It's not so much the words used in scripture but what and how those words mean and make meaning.
This is why it's so important to study the bible. Much more important than just reading the bible.
Like reading a book on astrophysics and studying a book on astrophysics.
Consider this about some Pentacostals that believe handling pit vipers is a religious expression of faith:
In the King James Bible, Mark 16:18 says, "They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them."
"For me, taking up serpents is like Catholics using wine in their religious ceremonies," Hamblin said. "If people have their right to do things maybe I don't agree with or uphold, I'm not going to judge them." From:
Pentecostal Pastors Argue 'Snake Handling' Is Their Religious Right - ABC News
The author compares handling poisonous snakes with Catholics using wine in religious ceremonies.
Really?
Playing with poisonous snakes is like Catholics using wine in ceremonies. Wow! That is convoluted reasoning.
The author isn't going to judge Catholics? Somehow handling poisonous snakes is like judging?
The pastor that authored the above DIED from being bitten by a rattlesnake while members of his flock watched & would not
call for medical help because the pastor was exhibiting his faith.
This dangerous "expression of faith" taken from a bit of the bible all out of context with the rest of the chapter(s).
This expression of faith without sound understanding of ALL the scriptures.
All of them. The name of the Pentacostal church? Ready? Drum roll please.
"Full Gospel Tabernacle in Jesus Name". Evidently the pastor missed the first word of the name of his chruch.
He missed the meaning and how it made meaning.
Snake-handling Pentecostal pastor killed by rattlesnake bite
A little bit of the bible can be downright dangerous.
(yes I know I used "bit" 2 X about being bitten by a snake)
All you have is the literal meaning of a Greek word, one that hasn't meant "just a pole/stake" in common vernacular for centuries even before Jesus, and the use of poles/stakes as torture that again predate Jesus.
That's just being pedantic. If you're going to literally translate that word, without context or recognition of how languages change, you have to do it for the entirety of the Bible. And if you did, you're going to end up with an utterly unreadable mess, especially the Old Testament.
Good for you. Again, I only care about historical accuracy.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
When rendering the word "stauros" Christendom's Bibles invariably use the word "cross". But the Complete Jewish Bible carries no such bias towards the cross. It renders "stauros" as "stake".
Matthew 27:39-40...."People passing by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, “So you can destroy the Temple, can you, and rebuild it in three days? Save yourself, if you are the Son of God, and come down from the stake!” (CJB)
Hebrews 6:6...."and then have fallen away — it is impossible to renew them so that they turn from their sin, as long as for themselves they keep executing the Son of God on the stake all over again and keep holding him up to public contempt." (CJB)
The other word used for the instrument used for Jesus execution is "xyʹlon" which some translate "tree" and which the CJB consistently translates as "stake".
Acts 5:30..."The God of our fathers raised up Yeshua, whereas you men killed him by having him hanged on a stake." (CJB)
Acts 10:39....“As for us, we are witnesses of everything he did, both in the Judean countryside and in Yerushalayim. They did away with him by hanging him on a stake" (CJB)
Acts 13:29 "and when they had carried out all the things written about him, he was taken down from the stake and placed in a tomb." (CJW)
Galatians 3:13...."The Messiah redeemed us from the curse pronounced in the Torah by becoming cursed on our behalf; for the Tanakh says, “Everyone who hangs from a stake comes under a curse.”
1 Peter 2:24..."He himself bore our sins in his body on the stake, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness — by his wounds you were healed." (CJB)
Well, it isn't just JW's who see that the cross does not belong in the Bible.
This is a religious debate forum after all.
That's two. Two editions of the Bible that are practically in diapers when compared to others.
Ever heard of the Epistle of Barnabas? 1st Century(between 70-131) document wherein the method of execution of Jesus is described as being shaped like the Greek letter 'Tau' or T. There's also the account of Justin Martyr(100-165). So, individuals within the first few decades of Jesus describe it as something with a crossbeam.
Then we can look at Dionysius of Halicarnassus(65BC-7AD) who describes crucifixion as thus;
A Roman citizen of no obscure station, having ordered one of his slaves to be put to death, delivered him to his fellow-slaves to be led away, and in order that his punishment might be witnessed by all, directed them to drag him through the Forum and every other conspicuous part of the city as they whipped him, and that he should go ahead of the procession which the Romans were at that time conducting in honour of the god. The men ordered to lead the slave to his punishment, having stretched out both his arms and fastened them to a piece of wood which extended across his breast and shoulders as far as his wrists, followed him, tearing his naked body with whips.
So we have multiple accounts of crucifixion from just-before or during the time of Jesus all describing a crossbeam. Then the earliest accounts of the Jesus Crucifixion proper also demonstrate a crossbeam. All the evidence in your favour relies on a single, literal meaning of words, refusing to take into account that words have multiple definitions. Nor does it account for the linguistic drift, as I've stated 'stauros' came to most often mean a stake + crossbeam a few centuries before Jesus, and remained that way during his time and after.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Anyway, let's have a nice pagan Easter, lots of chocolate and no church! 
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Weight of numbers is no proof. In the Bible, the true worshippers of God were different to everybody else.
Without bias toward a lot of Christendom's teachings, the possibility is still there.
The cross (crux) was of several kinds. The forms in which the cross is represented are as follows:
- The crux simplex (I). An upright pole (called the crux simplex) was used for the purpose of crucifixion. A combination of the upright pole and a crossbeam formed another simple type of cross. The person to be crucified would carry the crossbeam to the place of execution. The crossbeam would then be attached to the post.
- The crux decussata (X), also called the crux Andreana, because according to tradition St. Andrew was said to have suffered upon it.
- The crux commissa (T), or St. Anthony's cross. This type of cross was formed like a T.
- The crux immissa (t), or Latin cross, which was the kind of cross on which Jesus Christ died. The Latin cross had a longer descending arm associated with the cross of Jesus crucifixion.
Since the exact configuration of the "stauros" is not specifically stated in the Bible, we cannot state categorically that Jesus died on a cross.
Since the "crux simplex" was used by the Romans as an instrument of execution and Jesus had done nothing wrong according to Roman law, there was no reason to make his death into something against Rome that required sending a strong message to onlookers. Jesus was nobody to Rome. He was only somebody to the Jewish leaders who threatened to report Pilate for treason if he did not acquiesce to their demands....treason was a crime that was regarded as one of the most serious against Rome. Pilate could have wound up suffering an even more ignominious death than Jesus....and he knew it.
That may well be true, but regardless of the configuration, a Christian would not want a religious symbol, pre-dating the death of Jesus by centuries and associated with unsavory pagan worship, to be used to represent Christ's sacrifice.
As I have mentioned before....the instrument used to kill someone you love is not something to be idolised.
We are commanded by God to refrain from "making" images of "anything" to do with our worship. Period.
Can you imagine a modern day Jesus, executed by firing squad or lethal injection having his followers decorate their places of worship with a gun or a syringe? It is not only bizarre.....it is idolatry.
Last edited:
I wasn't going for weight of numbers, I was going for weight of the ages.
Or that he died on a stake. At least we're making progress.
I'm going to say this again, for what might be the fifth or so time, that the religious teachings of the Bible are nigh-meaningless to me.
Be it "appropriate" symbolism for Jesus, what is or isn't Idolatry, the repulsive notion of original/inherited sin I could not care less. I'm Asatru. My only interest is in historical accuracy. And as I have also repeatedly stated, historically it is most likely that Jesus was crucified with some manner of crossbeam. Be it Comissa or Immissa.
I'll freely admit that no one is able to prove it one way or the other. But the crossbeam has without question, the most weight of historical evidence. So it is more probable that Jesus was executed with a crossbeam.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
@Nietzsche....you are free to believe whatever you wish for whatever reason you wish....and so am I.
Since we have no conclusive evidence for either camp.....like the theory of evolution....it is a matter of opinion, based on whose research we want to accept.
Since we have no conclusive evidence for either camp.....like the theory of evolution....it is a matter of opinion, based on whose research we want to accept.
Not all research is equivalent.
This smells vaguely of someone too proud to admit defeat. I can respect that.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Not defeat at all. It is an admission that neither one of us has dibs on what is fact. No one was there except the eye witnesses who wrote the accounts. If we discredit them, we are left with nothing. We can only assert what seems like the most likely scenario to us as our viewpoints are different.
Popular opinion has not always proved to be correct....and heaven knows Christ never enjoyed popular opinion. He said his true disciples wouldn't either. (John 15:18-21)
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
That is true...pick your scholar....pick your religion....pick your beliefs....or pick none of them.
We are all free to go where our own heart leads us....and that is as it should be. This is why God can judge us fairly, because we choose our own destiny.....whether we believe that or not doesn't really matter.
The Easter eggs, rabbits, etc. have nothing at all to do with the resurrection of Jesus/Yeshua. We all know by now that it had Pagan beginnings. My theory is that the Pagans who converted to Christianity way, way back did not want to give up all their practices and decided to "Christianize" them. I have no evidence, however, to back me up; it's just an idea of mine.
I cannot begin to tell you how much I loathe the martyr-complex so many Christians seem to have. I could spend hundreds of pages detailing how disgustingly self-righteous it is for someones' first response to criticism or perceived adversity to be "Oh we must be right, people disagree with us!". It's the exact same argument used by all manner of political & religious extremists, that somehow if the world(and facts) are against them it means they must have it right.
They're fertility symbols. Who cares. There's nothing wrong with celebrating the change of seasons unless you're some neo-Cathar who thinks the material world is completely evil.