Leo, thanks for the link to your other post. I have it saved in my word processor so I can read it a little at a time. Plus I never even thought of the idea that Jesus was not put to death on a symbol but on something which was a means of execution. Excellent!
Posted a question about the cross/stake on Yahoo
by rassillon 20 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
IP_SEC
Leolaia, who ARE you? You are so well-informed, I'm awestruck.
JWD's most awesome go to girl for Lingo questions.
-
rassillon
IP_SEC.....I thought Leolaia was a girl too (I guess cause of the name) then Leolaia posted some pics from a trip with several having a guy in them. I could have sworn that it was said that that was Leolaia......I could be wrong.
Leolaia, about that question getting to the heart of the matter.....The question is not mine, someone else posed it here on the board at one time, it took me a little while to understand how profound it was. So I can't take credit for it...
The more and more I talk to JWs, I realize how little they know about what they "believe" or any of the facts behind their claims. -
John Doe
I honestly don't see why this would even be a debate among Christians. After all, what possible difference does it make if it were a cross or a stake? Does it have anything to do with the sacrifice of Christ? I guess maybe a stake is more uncomfortable than a cross and so the sacrifice on a stake is more important? No? Then why even argue it?
-
keyser soze
The bible most assuredly does NOT offer any proof that the stake was actually a cross of two intersecting beams. The actual facts of the bible may be enlightening to examine...
John 20:25- "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails..."
Why is it plural? If it was an upright stake there would only have been one nail used.
-
Leolaia
John Doe....It makes no difference at all theologically. The only reason imho why it is an important topic for discussion is that the Society has made false and inaccurate statements in support of its view. It is a matter of intellectual honesty, not a matter of theology.
keyser.....If you take a look at my main thread on the subject, I discuss this matter in detail and find that this argument is not necessarily 100% certain. Plautus indicates that feet and arms may have been sometimes double-nailed. Moreover, if the hands are not pinned together but placed on either side of the stake, then a separate nail would be required for each arm. The strongest biblical evidence that Jesus' stauros is conceived as having a crossbeam are the references to Jesus or Simon of Cyrene carrying the cross to Golgotha. That is the detail that decidedly points of the use of a patibulum.
rassillon....Yeah you're confused. There are no photos of me in my travel photos thread and my photos of Kim Clijsters thread....dunno what else you have been thinking of. I've posted pics of myself in the many "post your picture" threads here.
-
truthsearcher
Of course the Romans had the ability to create a cross, and probably did. But ask yourself: why they would have bothered when a simple stake would have worked just as well or better?
This answer obviously misses the whole point of crucifixion--a long slow torturous death, in which the outstretched arm postion allowed for the greatest amount of time (days, since the sufferer could still breath). The overhead arms postition has been shown in studies and by eyewitnesses in German concentration camps to have caused death in a matter of minutes.
-
keyser soze
Leolaia- thanks for clearing that up for me. I bow to your wisdom. I guess I was still thinking like a JW. I was remembering how it was always portrayed in illustrations in their publications, with one nail through the hands.
-
Leolaia
keyser....It's a worthwhile point that you made, it is just not conclusive because it does not exclude other explanations. Just as there wasn't one way to execute someone on a two-beamed cross, there wasn't necessarily a single way to nail someone to a single stake...tho there are certainly fewer ways, with one less degree of freedom.
-
jeanV
Thank you Leolaia, very instructive. I had the same thought like keyser. btw WTS does not quote Plautus but says that nails could refer to hands and feet (which is not what the scripture says).
Somewhere else I read in support of the cross argument matthew 27:37 (they posted above his head the charge...). I guess one could argue that technically above the hands would also be above the head