Crucifixion

by LunaFing 14 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  LunaFing

  So I was wondering........why do JW's insist that Jesus was not put on a "cross" but on a stake?
• 

  sacolton

  IMHO, to rid themselves of anything resembling a Christian.
• 

  babygirl75

  I agree...that is a distinctive difference from all other religions. This keeps them seperate.
• 

  Terry

  It begins with J.F.Rutherford.

  He and those who surrounded him were ANTI-mainstream christianity.

  Contrarians.

  Whatever the churches did---Rutherford would re-brand and do the opposite.

  Whatever christians believed--Rutherford would make sure his name brand JW's did the opposite.

  Day for Night. Black is White.

  It was up to the chief "Prophet" Fred Franz and others to cut and paste the right scriptures to back it all up with "new light" blah blah blah.

  Funny thing is, it worked.

  Rutherford created a new brand. Like 7-UP is the UN-cola.

  The "reasoning" and the scriptures and the cherry picked passages from historians is beside the point.

  This religion can justify anything with their corkscrew hermenutics and pretzel logic.

  Personally, I think Rutherford was strongly influenced by people like Alexander Hislop and his TWO BABYLONS.

  Anti-Catholicism boiled up inside Rutherford and it extened to Protestantism and even Government.

  He and his religion became iconoclastic and Luddite.
• 

  james_woods

  There was a very interesting History Channel program on crucifixion last night.

  It made it pretty clear that although some ancient peoples did practice impalement (i.e. "torture stake") - most many centuries BC, the T or t shaped cross (so-called Roman Cross or Tau Cross) - was in fact the common Roman practice. Some contraversy may exist on whether the cross bar was attached at the very top of the upright stake or somewhat down from the top, as most christian art has depicted. In all cases for Roman crucifixion in this time period, though - a cross bar was the norm. There was absolutely no credence given to the idea of a simple stake being in use at the time of the first Century A.D. by the Romans.

  I too have often wondered at the stubborn insistence of the JWs that this was a mere stake. I guess all the theories above show some possible cause - they want to be different, they don't want to use symbols that are common in normal christianity (no matter how ancient), they want to find something to insist they are right about. Sillyiest of all is the suggestion that the "cross was pagan". Well - duh? It was done by the pagan Romans, right? Anyway - what is the big deal? Nobody knows for sure - it is not like we can just go to the videotape.

  One of the commentators says that the reverence that mainstraim Christianity holds for the cross is a statement to the world that they believed in the resurrection and therefore turned the object of assasination against the heathens by making it a religious symbol. I thought that nicely countered the classic JW line that "you would not worship an electric chair, would you?" in regard to the cross.
• 

  james_woods

  BTW - Terry - I think you are absolutely right on the Alexander Hislop and "The Two Babylons" angle. In the 1960s, this book was viewed as being "almost JW material". Many pioneers themselves, and I would say at least half of all KH libraries had a copy. That was, of course, before the paranoia came about "books from outside the WTS". Oak Glen in Oklahoma City, my original cong, even at one time had a copy of Fox's Book of Martyrs. What for, I cannot imagine, but it was a lot more interesting than Babylon the Great has Fallen Again and Can't Get Up.

  BTW - I went on a home bible study with a special Pioneer who had a copy of the Hislop book. He was going to show this barely literate householder that the cross was wrong, and this was his primary source. After he laid it down on the couch, open to his reference page, the lady's cat jumped up on the couch and did a magnificent fur-ball heave right into the center binding of it!

  Shows what a well-trained witches familiar can do when they really set their minds to it, no?
• 

  BabaYaga

  Terry, each of your posts is better than the last. That bit was just awesome.
• 

  LockedChaos

  Terry
  
  Brilliant!!
  I think you are spot on.
  
  Bravo
• 

  LunaFing

  Terry- Thank you for your post. Could you direct me to a website where I could read a little more about what you wrote? I'd appreciated, thanks. :D
• 

  LunaFing

  James- I saw that program last night as well! It got me thinking about the JW's and their views on the crucifixion and that's why I started this thread. :)