Did Jesus Die On a Stake or a Cross?
by Sea Breeze 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Sea Breeze
Early Christian prayer desk found in Herculaneum. It was buried under 50 ft. of ash in 79 A.D.
-
mikeflood
I'll bet this new GB in process gonna go back to the cross (remember the crown and the cross, many years ago?), they have support in the Bible where it says something like "take your cross and follow me constantly".
It's not like they gonna be worshipping the cross or with images of the Egyptian cross ansata...
Remember, mainstream is the motto now
-
peacefulpete
Seabreeze....Alleged Christian Crosses in Herculaneum and Pompeii on JSTOR
The cruciform indentation in a wall of Herculaneum was probably left by the support for a shelf.
-
peacefulpete
I mentioned symbolism of "suspension", aka crucifixion. Note Philo's metaphoric/symbolic language associated with the practice.
......for it follows of necessity, that the body must be thought akin to the souls that love the body, and that external good things must be exceedingly admired by them, and all the souls which have this kind of disposition depend on dead things, and, like persons who are crucified, are attached to corruptible matter till the day of their death. (62) But the soul that is united to virtue has for its inhabitants those persons who are preeminent for virtue, persons whom the double cavern has received in pairs, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebeckah, Leah and Jacob, virtues and those who possess them; Chebron itself keeping the treasure-house of the memorials of knowledge and wisdom, which is more ancient than Janis and the whole land of Egypt, for nature has made the soul more ancient than the body, that is than Egypt, and virtue more ancient than vice, that is than Janis (and the name Janis, being interpreted, means the command of answer), estimating seniority rather by dignity than by length of time.
Crucifixion had taken on a moral/philosophical meaning beyond the obvious OT connotation of humiliation and curse.
Early Gnostic Christians retained a similar view. Some allegorized the Logos/primal man descending to a lower state as a crucifixion.
These early theologies are easiest explained as a continuum of earlier Jewish thought.
-
peacefulpete
Regarding the use of 'pagan' symbols, remember the Hezekiah seal?
Unsurprisingly it contained the Egyptian ankh.
-
peacefulpete
Graffito of a crucified person.
Ἀλκίμιλα is written top left.
EDR178207. H. 0.35.Photo: Camodeca 2018, p. 207. dated 110-140 ce
-
peacefulpete
New to me was a legendary version of the death of Cyrus. The liberator/messiah of Jewish people. Maybe stretching but then again part of the zeitgeist of the day.
Diodorus Siculus (1cent BCE):
2 For instance, when Cyrus the king of the Persians, the mightiest ruler of his day, made a campaign with a vast army into Scythia, the queen of the Scythians not only cut the army of the Persians to pieces but she even took Cyrus prisoner and crucified him;....
-
PetrW
@JW Scholar:
What bunkum. Scholar is wary of a fellow who purports to represent scholarship wears a cap for it is not a good look.
Seriously his arguments are weak and absurd. The simple fact of the matter is that the lexical evidence for stauros in both its noun and verbal form means 'a upright pole or stake'. Over time the word came to mean a two-pieced instrument, a cross and this is given as second meaning for the Greek word. The Gospel writers who witnessed the execution of Jesus described the instrument as a stake- a single piece of wood and not as two-pieced instrument. It would have been impossible for Jesus to carry a cross over some distance over a rough road for some distance in a severely weakened state. The argument that he carried the patibulum is fanciful.
Although we cannot be dogmatic about the instrument of Jesus 'execution the NWT was quite correct in rendering the Greek word as 'torture stake' based on lexicography rather than 'cross' which is based on tradition.
***
PW: I think that nowadays it is difficult to determine whether it was a simple stake or some (and what?) wooden construction. The problem, in my opinion, is that it is impossible to decide exactly whether it was a Roman method of punishment and execution or just some "local", Jerusalem variant. Therefore, literary references from outside of what was then Palestine do not shed much light on the issue. The references to e.g. Livy are, in my opinion, with a question mark... Another problem, may appear to be the fact that two others were executed with Jesus. So it can be assumed that there was relatively time to build the "cross" and it was intended to be an execution to act as a deterrent to others. No expense had to be spared in the use of wood, especially as the condemned brought it themselves. In fact, "crucifixions" often took the form of mass executions of up to several thousand people, and it can be assumed that there were no "ceremonies"...
From this point of view, Josephus Flavius, as a Greek-writing Jew, becomes more important. He uses the Greek σταυρος, both for the execution instrument, but also, and this is very interesting, to describe technical constructions. In Bell Jud 3:215 and 5:469-470, σταυρος occurs in the sense of a support (the Roman ramrod 3:215 and the corridor support 5:469-470). Technically these could be crossed beams, but in any case they are wooden posts/columns which, usually sunk into the ground, serve (see 3,215) as a support/bearing part for some other beams (δοκος) above them. Any wooden plank, beam, or log embedded in the ground for some function, as a support for something else, could be said to be a σταυρος.
However, if we want to say that a σταυρος is always and only a pole driven into the ground, then we are referring to texts in the NT where σταυρος is used to mean that it is uncarried (Simon of Cyrene carries a σταυρος according to Matt 27:32). Jesus, even before his death, gives the call to carry the σταυρος (Mat 10:38). Jesus, as the son of a carpenter, then knew the difference/agreement between σταυρος and δοκος (Mat 7:3 about the splinter and beam of δοκος in his brother's eye), so if σταυρος could be worn as δοκος, then it is possible to consider it, that there was already a prepared stake σταυρος on Golgotha, which was then driven into the ground, and Jesus (Simon of Cyrene) brought another σταυρος, in technical terms, a beam δοκος (possibly: plank or log). The resulting design would have been a classical cross, as an inscription was placed above the head of Christ - this requires that the σταυρος was longer than the one being executed. Up to this point, meeting the "technical" requirements for the above description, a simple wooden column/pole would of course also do. But here are some reasons to ponder that may compromise the simple pillar/stake hypothesis:
- Matt. 27:37 specifically says that the inscription in three languages was "over his head" and not "over his hands," which is what one would expect if Jesus was executed on a simple wooden pillar/stake.
- John 20:27 writes in the plural about the hands where the wounds should have been - again rather suggestive of a classical cross
- Matt 27:38 (see parallels) then states that the other two executed were on Jesus' right and left - if we compare the passage just a short time before, in Matt 27:29, then Matthew by "right" was probably referring to, the actual right hand, not just the place on the "right" side...
So, from my point of view, it is difficult to decide whether Jesus was executed on a stake/pole, which the etymology would support, or that the σταυρος was folded into the form of a cross at Golgotha.
*
However, the problem I see on the JWs side is that they have taken the cross/stake issue to an extreme where all who claim the cross are incorporated into a "false religion" and only those who worship the stake are the true, God-led ones. If the JWs had stayed on the plane of seeking and attempting to improve their understanding of the NT-text, then all would have been OK.
But as a JW one cannot question or argue with GB's decision on the stake. And that's exactly the most fundamental and worst point (not only) about this matter - a totally insignificant thing gets turned into a fundamental issue.
To put it another way: once JWs say that anyone who thinks Jesus died on the cross can remain in the JW fellowship without some negative sanction is allowed to use the term "cross" in public teaching as against other JWs or third parties, then I'll start to think that JWs have abandoned dogma and started to return to the gospel...
-
peacefulpete
PetrW...nice comment.
Another interesting element from the all-pervasive Plato, in discussing with Socrates, the just man in contrast to the unjust:
Plat. Rep. 2.361-2
...our theory must set the just man at his side—a simple and noble man, who, in the phrase of Aeschylus, does not wish to seem but be good. Then we must deprive him of the seeming.4 For if he is going to be thought just [361c] he will have honors and gifts because of that esteem. We cannot be sure in that case whether he is just for justice' sake or for the sake of the gifts and the honors. So we must strip him bare of everything but justice and make his state the opposite of his imagined counterpart.5 Though doing no wrong he must have the repute of the greatest injustice, so that he may be put to the test as regards justice through not softening because of ill repute and the consequences thereof. But let him hold on his course unchangeable even unto death, .... What they will say is this: that such being his disposition the just man will have to endure the lash, the rack, chains, the branding-iron in his eyes, and finally, after every extremity of suffering, he will be crucified.
Unquestioningly, the writers of the NT were aware of these writings. Might this concept have helped shape the story?
