I like steak "medium" please
Cross or Stake, which is biblically true??
by butalbee 60 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
William Penwell
At the beginning of the summer of 1968 a team of archaeologists under the direction of V. Tzaferis discovered four cave-tombs at Giv'at ha-Mivtar (Ras el-Masaref), which is just north of Jerusalem near Mount Scopus and immediately west of the road to Nablus. The date of the tombs, revealed by the pottery in situ, ranged from the late second century B.C. until A.D. 70. These family tombs with branching chambers, which had been hewn out of soft limestone, belong to the Jewish cemetery of Jesus' time that extends from Mount Scopus in the east to the Sanhedriya tombs in the north west.
Within the caves were found fifteen limestone ossuaries which contained the bones of thirty-five individuals. These skeletons reveal under the examination of specialists a startling tale of the turbulence and agony that confronted the Jews during the century in which Jesus lived. Nine of the thirty-five individuals had met violent death. Three children, ranging in ages from eight months to eight years, died from starvation. A child of almost four expired after much suffering from an arrow wound that penetrated the left of his skull (the occipital bone). A young man of about seventeen years burned to death cruelly bound upon a rack, as inferred by the grey and white alternate lines on his left fibula. A slightly older female also died from conflagration. An old women of nearly sixty probably collapsed from the crushing blow of a weapon like a mace; her atlas, axis vertebrae and occipital bone were shattered. A woman in her early thirties died in childbirth, she still retained a fetus in her pelvis. Finally, and most importantly for this note, a man between twenty-four and twenty-eight years of age was crucified.
The name of the man was incised on his ossuary in letters 2 cm high: Jehohanan. He was crucified probably between A.D. 7, the time of the census revolt, and 66, the beginning of the war against Rome.... According to Dr. N. Haas of the Department of Anatomy, Hebrew University--Hadassah Medical School, Jehohanan experienced three traumatic episodes. The cleft palate on the right side and the associated asymmetries of his face likely resulted from the deterioration of his mother's diet during the first few weeks of pregnancy. The disproportion of his cerebral cranium (pladiocephaly) were caused by difficulties during birth. All the marks of violence on the skeleton resulted directly or indirectly from crucifixion.
A description of Jehohanan's death would be helpful toward imaging Jesus' suffering since both were crucified by the Romans in the same century and not far from the walls of Jerusalem. The lower third of his right radial bone contains a groove that was probably caused by the friction between a nail and the bone. Hence, his arms were nailed to the patibulum through the forearms and not through the wrists, the bones of which 'were found undamaged.' It is logical to infer, therefore, that, contrary to the customary portrayal in paintings and biographies,' Jesus had his arms pierced and not his hands. We should probably translate the only two passages in the Gospels that mention of the crucified Jesus (Lk 24, Jn 20) not as 'hands', but with Hesiod, Rufus Medicus, and others as 'arms'. Hence, according to Jn 20, Jesus said to Thomas, 'place your finger here and observe my arms...'
The legs had been pressed together, bent, and twisted to that the calves were parallel to the patibulum. The feet were secured to the cross by one iron nail driven simultaneously through both heels (tuber calcanei). The iron nail contains after its round head the following: sediment, fragments of wood (Pistacia or Acacia), a limy crust, a portion of the right heel bone, a smaller piece of the left heel bone, and a fragment of olive wood. It is apparent that Jehohanan had been nailed to the olive wood cross with the right foot above the left. Dr. Haas is undoubtedly correct, furthermore, in concluding that the iron nail bent approximately 2 cm because it hit a knot necessitating the amputation of the feet to remove the corpse from the cross.
While Jehohanan was on the cross, presumably after an interval of some time, his legs were fractured. Once forcible blow from a massive weapon delivered the coup de grace, shattering the right shins into slivers, and fracturing the left ones, that were contiguous with the cross (simplex), in a simple, oblique line.
The above discoveries throw some light on the manner in which Jesus died, but the question with which we began has not been adequately answered. How could Jesus have died so soon?
Christian art has continuously portrayed Jesus as attached to the cross with his extremities fully extended. Jehohanan's torso was forced into a twisted position with his calves and thighs bent and unnaturally twisted. Since the bent nail did not secure the legs to the cross, a plank (sedecula) was probably fastened to the simplex, providing sufficient support for the buttocks and prolonging torture. If Jesus had been crucified in a similar fashion, and we cannot be certain of this although it is probable, his contorted muscles probably would have generated spasmodic contractions (tetanizations) and rigid cramps would eventually permeate the diaphragm and lungs so as to prohibit inhalation and exhalation. Jesus could have died after six hours.
The two crucified with Jesus, however, did not die so quickly--could this have been because they had not been previously tortured, or because they had been crucified in another manner? Perhaps it is logical to assume that because Jesus had been the centre of attention for at least the preceding week he might have received more of the executioners' attention prior to the final acts of crucifixion. Especially would this be the situation if the other two were crucified because they had been judged to be robbers or criminals (cf. Km 15, Mt 27, and Lk 23) but Jesus condemned for insurrection against Rome. These speculations are not wild but they do extend beyond all the available data: we can only wonder why Jehohanan was crucified, why his legs were broken, and if there were a particularly torturous crucifixion for one charged with insurrection. As we search for these answers we must remember Jesus' particular circumstance: the torture could not last more than seven hours because the approaching Sabbath must not be violated, especially near conservative Jerusalem.
In conclusion, we now have empirical evidence of a crucifixion. Death on a cross could be prolonged or swift. The crucifixion of Josephus' acquaintance who survived should not be projected to the crucifixion of Jesus. The major extrabiblical paradigm for crucifixion is no longer Josephus; it is the archaeological data summarized above. The crucifixion of Jesus, who did not possess a gladiator's physique and stamina, did not commence but culminated when he was nailed to the cross. After the brutal, all night scourging by Roman soldiers, who would have relished an opportunity to vent their hatred of the Jews and disgust for Palestinian life, Jesus was practically dead. I see not reason why the Synoptic account does not contain one of the few bruta facta from his life when it reports that, as he began to stagger from Herod's palace to Golgotha, he was too weak to carry the cross; Simon of Cyrene carried it for him. Metaphors should not be confused with actualities nor faith with history. It is not a confession of faith to affirm that Jesus died on Golgotha that Friday afternoon; it is a probability obtained by the highest canons of scientific historical research. The humanists' and rationalists' facile answer to the question why Jesus died so quickly is no longer acceptable in critical circles; note, for example, the concluding remark in the most recent 'biography' of Jesus by a Jewish scholar: 'Others thought that he called out in despair: "My God, my God (Eli, Eli), why hast thou forsaken me?" And Jesus died."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/jesus/crucifixion.html
-
plmkrzy
William Penwell
That was extreemely facinating reading, I remember reading something simmular (or it may have been this) some time ago but not is such detail. It completely validates the more so then ever the importance of remembering what Jesus said and why he said to his deciples to continue to remember thier last supper and share this with all those who are WILLING to LISTEN. To go through that kind of degridation, humilitation, and torture for his people is more then incredible and
doing it knowing that there will be people who will continue to reject him.ARoarer
"Abraham, the israelites, practiced the same blood sacrifices to appease their god, the way many other pagans sacrificed humans and animals to appease thier gods. History proves that."So what you are saying is you do not believe that Jesus is Christ.
Thats fine.
And I don't know why you keep insisting my knowledge is comming from the WT and not the Bible. I get all of my information from various different Bibles and I seriously doubt that you have read any.Beans "I like steak "medium" please"
Would you like baked patoe or fries with that?"
-
ARoarer
William Penwell thats awesome information. Thankyou for the research. I love reading about, and also watching documentaries about Biblical History. For me, it is not as significant in my own worship, wheather or not Christ died on the cross or the "steak" but rather, that the meaning of his birth, death, and ressurrection, and honoring each one and keeping it special within my family. Last year was the first time we chose not to go to the "Memorial". Instead, we wanted to have a quiet dinner at home, with the unleavened bread and an excellent bottle of wine. My neighbor who is an elderly Jewish lady in a wheelchair, was very depressed because her daughter who was away would not be reading the Sadah during her passover celebration. She had never in her 76 years missed this celebrational reading of the Sadah. My husband agreed to to it with her and her Brazilian caregiver. I prepared her traditional meal of the unleavened bread, the bitter herbs and other ingredients, and we sat at dinner that sundown with her and my husband read the Sadah which is the account of the Israelites and the first passover. It was so beautiful to listen to it and my 15 year old daughter was very moved. After we had some Matzos and sipped the Wine and ate the bitter herbs and apples, and egg, we had dinner, and my husband then read the account of the Last Supper and we talked about the meaning of it and it's relation to her celebration. It was the most meaningful "Memorial" celebration as we read together with my husband parts of her Sadah, and she with her Brazilian girl, who is Christian also, read Scriptures with us in the Last Supper account. Again we sipped the wine and ate the matzos. She was so happy and it gave me and my family a rich and memorable celebration of what this Holy week was all about. It felt good not to be sitting at another overpacked overdressed kingdom hall where everyone is expected to reject the wine and unleavened bread, as if Chirst's death meant nothing for them. I look forward to new traditions in my family and new beginnings of recapturing our minds our hearts and most of all our spirits that being in this cult took away from us all those years. Again, thank you for your research.----------------------------------------------------------------------PlmkrzyQUOTE - "So what you are saying is you don't believe that Jesus is Christ that's fine"---------------------------------------------------------------------I don't believe I ever said that in my posts, that must be your own interpretation ----------------------------------------------------------------------QUOTE - "I don't know why you keep insisting my information is from the WT and not the Bible"----------------------------------------------------------------------Plmkrzy, I don't believe I ever said that in my posts, that must be your own misconception of what I said.----------------------------------------------------------------------QUOTE - "I get all my information from various different Bibles, and I seriously doubt that you have read any"----------------------------------------------------------------------Plmkrzy - I commend you that you read the Bible in many translations. I do, however, think that your comment is judgmental and abit sarcastic and mean spirited. My own faith is based on my own personal research of other translations of the Bibleand how I apply the principals that Christ taught. Thoughmy faith may differ from yours or others, should not cause me to show intolerance. I am still evolving after being a devout JW for over 30 years. I am still researching, sort-ing old beliefs and misconceptions, retaining some and alsodisgarding others. It has not been easy but I and my familyhave come out of this intact, and now are redefining our selves. That is what this process is all about, udoing thehold WT had on us and learning to try and trust again. You have never walked in my shoes nor I yours, and I do not know if you are a JW in or out or not, but you are here onthis board, and I respect that. So Peace !!
-
ARoarer
Sorry everyone for the messup in the above post. I had trouble and almost lost it. -
Adonai438
Adonai438
"Like mentioned before-- God placed enough importance on the birth of Jesus to put 100's of prophecies predicting his comming in the Bible"Thats very true but the prophecies were not for the purpose of having a birthday party they were for the purpose of identifying Jesus as the TRUE savior. The prophecies were a map to the true son of God so their could be no doubt that he was in fact authintic. There were many many many frauds proclaiming to be the Christ but jesus could be the only possible Christ child because of the profecies that pointed to his birth.
And as far as the men bringing gifts. They weren't happy they were seeking to find out if he was in fact the true Christ child for the purpose of KILLING HIM! They didn't want the slaves to have a savior to reek havoc! possibly causing a loss of control in the land. These other kings were not going to sit idlely by and wait for these people to produce a Lord and Savior, not for a minute.Adonai438
The point is, cross or stake is a translation issue and their translation has no historical baking or proof while the cross does.
They just want another reason to be different.You seem to be under the dilussion that this is a JW thing when in FACT it is not. As regards to JWs it is just something they did not adopt. There are more faiths then there are not that don't worship the cross. The worshiping of the cross is a new idea and people have been practicing worship for as long as man has a history. It is a cold hard fact that the cross is a NEW IDEA.
the idea of NEVER FORGETING WHAT CHRIST WENT THROUGH BECAUSE OF THE WAY HE DIED has been arround since Christ died. But unfortunately it has for the most part been forgotten.Respectfully, PlmKrzy, Firstly, You mentioned the only purpose for the gift bringing was to kill Jesus so they would lose control of their slaves and land: The magi were from the east- They were not political rulers in the area, therefore they had no political agenda to lose out on by the savior being born. The Bible says that it was Herod that wanted to kill Jesus. Herod did not bring gifts nor ever catch up with them because an angel warned them to flee into egypt. The Magi(wise men) came from the far east because they saw and recognized the star God set in the sky as a sign to his son's birth, they came bearing Kingly gifts and they worshipped him.
Secondly, as regards to the cross, Christians don't worship it, it is a symbol for what God has done through Christ-- I really don't feel like retyping everything I already posted on this topic so please read my earlier post before answering this if you do- I know it's long and you may have not read it because of that. The cross is not a new concept, and the torture stake issue is primarily a JW issue unless you would like me to name a few of the spiritualistic religions and other cults that reject the cross. Modern day- as the JWs are only a little over 100 years old, they are the most numerous and well known that don't believe in the cross being used.
-
plmkrzy
ARoarer
Ok fine I read your reply and I will apologize for seeming mean spirited and spiteful. I actually was feeling mean spirited and spiteful due to your remarks because they tell me that you think of me and anyone else who chooses to listen to Jesus, as Satanic in nature. And that seems to me to be At Least mean spirited and spiteful.
That Is the way I took your remarks. If I misunderstood you then I do apologize."plmkrzy, Abraham, the israelites, practiced the same blood sacrifices to appease their god"
"Their god" Is Christ Jesus Father. Why would you, if you believe in Jesus being Christ accuse his father, the God of Abraham, of choosing a bunch of Satan worshipers to be his family line? You did in fact say that they practiced satanic rituals and were nothing but a bunch of pagans. And if you believe that Jesus and God are
the same then you would be referring to Jesus as a pagan
god while celebrating him at the same time. This type of scenario would make you hypocritical unless you believe
that Jesus was not who the Bible says he is and if that’s the case then why would you even consider believing in
Jesus at all. There are lots of characters in many other myths and fairy tails you could believe in why not “Jason and the Argonauts” for example?I am very familiar with the various rituals and practices among different Satanic cults and there is nothing with in the line of Abraham that would justify a "human" to call them Satanic unless they are just simply choosing to re-arrange the history of Christ to sound better to them selves. A lot of people do, I can't say that I don't. I also can't see how you can observe the Passover the way you have said and refer to Jesus father as a pagan god at the same time.
There is no sense in that, at least non-that I can see.You do what ever is right for you in your own heart. Best wishes.
Plm -
Solace
Another one of my least favorite J.W. Quotes-(Witnesses addressing people wearing crosses as jewelry) "Would you wear a gun aroung your neck"?! Yawn....Seriously tho, growing up a J.W. (God help me)! I have had issues with this, wondering why witnesses thought they had the only understanding of what Jesus died on, and why everyone else thought he died on a cross. I had to investigate, being the closet apostate that I was. I came across some scriptures that put doubts into my mind on the J.W teaching of the stake. John 20:25 refers to Jesus having marks from "nails" in his hands. Not "a nail" which leads me to think if he was on a stake, his hands would have been put together and had a large nail or similiar item to attatch. On a cross, his hands would have been seperated and therefore required more then one nail. "Nails". Another that caught my attention was John 21:18&19, in most Bibles refer to Jesus hands being outstretched. I have not seen it describing his hands being pulled upwards. Anyway, Does it really matter? Stake, Cross, who cares. I think its yet another way of J.W.s being "seperate from the world" and believing somthing completely different then everyone else. Basically giving them somthing else to debate. God knows they love to do that.
-
ARoarer
Plmkrzy, excuse me dear, but it must have been a type error. It should have read "the israelites............to appease their God"
That better hon?? [8>]I don't think I said the Israelites "were nothing but a bunch of pagans" Plm I think you just said that.
What I said was Abraham and the Israelites practiced the same sacrifices the way many other pagans sacrificed human and animals to appease thier gods. In other words, the context of that was that they, being imperfect Israelites, adopted some of the ways the pagans worshipped thier gods. Abraham believed his God wanted him to sacrifice his son, as he already did with animals. The Israelites also adopted sacrificing thier children to the fire for the god Marduk. In both instances the True God expected no such thing from them. I believe the the True God used these imperfect people with their imperfect ways of worshipping Him to eventually bring forth the line of his Son, Christ Jesus. Jesus did away with thier bloody form of worship to his Father by "nailing the Law to the cross/stake" as his sacrifice was once for all time. He was perfect and civiiized enough to realize we don't go around cutting up animals and humans to worship his Father, but because the Israelites knew nothing better, his own human sacrifice of himself would take the place of what they had known. But at the Last Supper Jesus did not invite them to cut him and drink his blood, or taste his flesh, although that was in fact what they thought he meant until he said to them "this MEANS, my body and this Means my blood. He took into consideration that they only knew this and would understand the illustration using the wine and the unleavened bread to symbolize what they were familiar with.
Kapeeeeesh????
-
butalbee
In regards to Gal. 6:14 my bible reads: But God Forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me and unto the world...King James Version.
WT bible is a corrupted version, never did I realize how much until I compared it to many other bibles.Do you know that the founder of WT(Russell) has a huge ornate pryamid, decorated with crosses as a tombstone? http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/2919/main2.html
Why does it matter--cross or stake? Well...it matters to JW's, a cross is symbollic to the cruxification(in most religions), to JW's it's pagan, when I was studying(God, help me), "It was a stake, no, not a cross," that was being pressured into my head. It was a big deal, it was something that they tried to break down within me.
The first time I studied, they began by saying a prayer...as they said Amen, I blessed myself with the sign of the cross(holy trinity), and their mouths dropped. At the time I was embarassed, but now I think maybe I should've splashed around some holy water to cast out the evil spirits.Hey, I'll take my steak rare with a baked potato.