by itsibitsybrainbutbigenoughtosmellarat 15 Replies latest watchtower bible
It's an interesting question, but even when I was the most die-hard JW I always thought this was much ado about not-that-much. Really what matters is the concept THAT Christ died for our sins, not HOW he died.
Now that I've woken up to TTATT the hypocrisy of JW's supposed search for "accurate knowledge" just infuriates me.
The WT leaders are completely incompetent and corrupt. They make the Pharisees of the Bible look like wannabe wankers.
00DAD
There was a thread on the book Crucifixion in Antiquity at the time it was published : Jesus-did-not-die-on-the-cross-Gunnar-Samuelsson
PSacramento have you read this book?
A couple of years ago, borrowed from one of my classmates ( theology class).
There was a thread on the book Crucifixion in Antiquity at the time it was published : Jesus-did-not-die-on-the-cross-Gunnar-Samuelsson
I remember that thread, Leo was in fine form in that one, like she usually is.
I think the issue here SEEMS to be one of idoltary and that it is improper to use the symbol of the cross in worshipping Jesus.
While for JW's the issue is clear, since they do NOT worship Jesus at all, it seems less clear for other denominations.
Probably why outside of the JW's no one cares that much about the shape of the Cross.
What I do think is a prime issue however, is the JW view that the cross should be viewe dupon with disdain or with negative feelings/conotions and I say this because that goes directly against what the Apostle Paul said:
Galatians 6:14 he says:But may it never be that I should boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
The book is expensive and many have not read it.
Yes, at US $100.00 and up, I'd say it's a very pricey book. I'm hoping it would come down to say $35 for it to be affordable.
As an ex-jw it was a surprize and reassuring to see that yet again, so many things portrayed to us as the indesputable truth, was actually a matter of opinion or doctrinal bias, etc...but in reality unknowable.
That's how I sum the dispute up. Even the two-beam cross that is handed down to us through Church tradition seemed to change when Constantine made Christianity a favored state religion. Before, church fathers appeared to consider being suspended on a crux / stauros as shameful; afterwards they were equating the instrument of Jesus' execution with a Roman tropaeum (victory cross). This in spite of the fact that at least since the Second Century CE (more likely IMO First Century BCE), the two were nearly identical (but there were key differences so people can tell them apart).
