May I be the First to comment on the Cross Or Not A Cross.....................
Who FUCKING CARES!!!!!!!!! LMAO
He DIED right?
Hung with nails? Cross Or Not?? Painful??? Yep!!!
Ok So He's Dead? Can we agree on that???
So who Cares Cross or NOT?
Jesus did not die on cross, says scholar
by leavingwt 20 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
jay88
Nor, did he return in "1914"
-
MeanMrMustard
The thing that will always kill me is, regardless what does it matter what he died on? I'm mean seriously, what does it matter? If one wants to make an issue over idolatry, or argue over the use of paraphernalia/artifacts during worship, that's one thing. Other than that to argue over whether it was an upright pole with or without a crossbeam is just as retarded as to argue over whether the wood was from a cedar or an oak tree.
You better believe it was oak! And if you think otherwise, then you are already destined for everlasting destruction. Praise Jah!
-
AnnOMaly
So that Mr. Samuelsson is not misunderstood (http://www.exegetics.org/ - Q and A):
Sadly some fellow Christians have misunderstood (with good help by media) what I have done in my research. I do not question the historicity of the crucifixion of Jesus. Neither do I enter the field of theology. As far as the historical and theological questions are concerned I believe as almost every Christian that Jesus was the son of God who was crucified for our sins, that he was raised from the dead after three days, that he is with God on this very day and will return in glory to judge the living and dead.
What I have dealt with in my research is mainly classical philology, that is, I am focusing on written text - and only on written texts. That is why I have left out, e.g., archeology and Christian art. ...
...
Q: How do you think Jesus died? In other words how would he have probably been executed according to the available evidence?
A: The question of how Jesus actually died, i.e., the area of historicity, is outside the scope of my investigation. My field is classical philology and New Testament exegesis, i.e., the area of text. My question is what knowledge we could derive from the texts themselves. The answer of my thesis is - and this is the provocative and widely misunderstood issue - that it is strikingly sparse, both in the ancient pre-Christian and extra-Biblical literature as well as the Biblical.
The overwhelming number of text offer only a noun (e.g., stauros) or a verb (e.g., anastauroun or anaskolopizein). In almost every lexicon or dictionary these terms are said to mean "cross" or "to crucify." But, as I try to show in my thesis, they are used in a much wider sense than that. The verbs refer to some kind of suspension of a human being, living or dead while the noun refers to the suspension device used in such suspension.
My topic appears almost to be made to be misunderstood. It is so close to the heart of the Christian fate that is easy to react emotionally instead of logically. But, there is no need to react in such way since I do not question the historicity of the death of Jesus. Neither do I question the traditional understanding of how he died. My question deals with to what extent a traditional understanding of the death of Jesus (i.e., that Jesus carried a crossbeam toward Calvary, but since he could not stand the burden of the cross a passer-by was forced to carry it for him. On Calvary the rest of the cross was awaiting, that the two parts were conjoined, and Jesus was then nailed to the crucifix-like cross) has support in the passion narratives.
As a matter of fact, these texts are strikingly silent when it comes to depicting the actual event. The texts say that Jesus carried a stauros, which has a much wider usage in antiquity than just referring to a "cross," towards Calvary, to be stauroun which is used in a much wider sense that just "to crucify." Why Jesus carried a stauros, what that looked like (e.g., was it the whole execution tool or just a part - the "crossbeam"), why a passer-by according to the Synoptics was forced to carry it for Jesus, the text is silent about. The actual execution texts are silent about how Jesus was attached to the execution device.
This is the heart of the problem. The text of the passions narratives is not that exact and information loaded, as we Christians sometimes want them to be.
-
-
Band on the Run
Well, the media gave him a lot of publicity. The trouble when you are mainstream is that you are boring. The Michael/Jesus Arianism strand bothers me deeply. I am now used to Jesus being God in some manner. The Christological debate is important. Details of his death pale by comparison. This only presents an issue if you believe God physically wrote scripture and that it is all correct, even express contradictions.
-
mindseye
True, the actual man known as Jesus was probably not crucified on a 'cross'. But a theological outlook that is so hung up on such petty literalism misses the profound psychological/mythological/spiritual importance of the symbolism.
http://nexusnovel.wordpress.com/2006/09/07/connection-of-heaven-earth-symbolism-of-cross-tree/
http://www.amazon.com/Symbolism-Cross-Rene-Guenon/dp/0900588659/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1
-
outsmartthesystem
"The thing that will always kill me is, regardless what does it matter what he died on? I'm mean seriously, what does it matter? If one wants to make an issue over idolatry, or argue over the use of paraphernalia/artifacts during worship, that's one thing. Other than that to argue over whether it was an upright pole with or without a crossbeam is just as retarded as to argue over whether the wood was from a cedar or an oak tree."
Amen! Back when I was an uber dub.....I would strongly argue that the "proof" I had that Jesus died on a stake and not a cross should CLEARLY be seen by others that witnesses are the only true religion! I never stopped to contemplate that it doesn't matter. It simply is not doctrinally based. Yet Witnesses argue as though it is.....and it is of such importance that it is routinely listed as one of the MAIN reasons Jesus "chose" the Watchtower society in 1919.
Ya know what it reminds me of? Ya know how most "worldly" people think that Adam sinned by eating an apple? Well....it makes most witnesses' blood boil when they hear that. They snidely reply "the bible only says it was a piece of fruit....it does not say what kind of fruit....yet people in christendom automatically assume it was an apple". I mean.....does it really matter? We aren't allowed to guess what fruit Adam ate....but witnesses can guess what vowels to use with YHWH?
If you believe in the bible.....it does not matter WHAT Jesus died on.....what matters is WHY he died. It does not matter what fruit Adam ate. What matter is that he sinned. Etc. Leave it to a witness to get picky about completely irrelevent things
-
botchtowersociety
The Watchtower will doubtless be quoting him in an upcoming issue.
-
BluesBrother
The point of contention is to question the WTS's scholarship on the issue. They insist that it was definitely not a cross. They fabricate misleading doctored quotes from other authors to support their claim.
Of course the shape of the implement does not matter, but the reliability of the WTS claims are what we are concerned with