The facts on crucifixion, stauros, and the "torture stake" (page 10)

lemans7

I just post the works of justus lipsius , the cruce, it is interesting the different methods of crucifiction that he depicts in his works, though the ancient form of punishment is using the single pole, or the crux simplex. later on was used the patibulum.

peacefulpete

lemans7, you are right. But the question is when did the Romans adapt the crux to have a second member? As Leolaia pointed out the evidence is clear that this was being done 2 hunderd years before the birth of Christianity. The WT is wrong and deliberately so.

Franz

Thank you for the work you put into this. Have you uncovered any evidence that the stauros was actually a Kiel'man'urshua (channeling beam) used to summon the LORD's council and therefore responsible for the darkness and thunder (sonic boom)caused by his fellow's driving their (chariot) following the chiefs death?

lemans7

Well, look if i were a roman i would used the easiest way to crucified a criminal, and that would had been using a single post, do you think, they really would had waisted their time trying to put together to pieces of wood?

lemans7

Also in april of 2005 in the national geographic channel, was televised and special program called , quest for the truth, the crucifiction. in this documentary, they depict of the different methods of execution included the torture stake or single poll.

Leolaia

Well, look if i were a roman i would used the easiest way to crucified a criminal, and that would had been using a single post, do you think, they really would had waisted their time trying to put together to pieces of wood?

Why do you think the Romans were only interested in what would be the easiest way to do the job? They instead wanted to make it as gruesome, painful, and horrific experience as possible for the victim. Josephus states that even when the Romans were executing thousands of Jews during the Jerusalem siege, they showed little constraint in experimenting with different ways of crucifying their victims. These Romans would not have done this to amuse themselves if it were a "waste of time".

The historical evidence shows that the Romans quite regularly "put together two pieces of wood" to crucify their victims, just read my post.

Also in april of 2005 in the national geographic channel, was televised and special program called , quest for the truth, the crucifiction. in this documentary, they depict of the different methods of execution included the torture stake or single poll.

I saw the program and if they did talk about the crux simplex, it would have been very brief because they spent a lot of time talking about the patibulum (crossbeam), and even recreated the patibulum-bearing procedure to see if Jesus would have either carried the whole cross or just the patibulum. They concluded that (in harmony with ancient texts) it was the crossbeam alone that Jesus would have most likely carried. This of course would pose a serious problem to the Society's interpretation, especially since the kind of cross-bearing that is described in the Gospels is exactly the patibulum-bearing punishment described in ancient texts.

lemans7

Well, Leolaila, number one Josephus did say only they used different methods of crucified the jews during the jerusalem siege i have josephus works. Now about the graphii they found nad it though to be dated of the 2nd century yes is a cross protraying jesus with a head of a donkey. but scienties make mistakes. for many years it was supposed that the nails were used in the wrists saying that the hand could not hold the weith of the body, but now in the las few years a dr. frederic zubige has made experimentes in his state of the art laboratory. and the conlcusion , is and you can see that there was only 20 pounds of weight in each arm. Now, i don't no , what religion you practiced, I'm just a beleiver. not a jw. In the same program in the ngc, they said that in the bible did not told us nothing about jesus falls, but is obvious that he fall or at least staggered. because the romans forced simon of cirene to carried his pole or patibulum if you see it like that. I ask 3 years ago Joe Zias the antropologies of jerusalem if could be possible that Jesus died on s sinlge pole. and he told me yes that could had been possible of many forms. There is not really any crucifix of the 1st century. nobody knows really how was Jesus shaped cross, and it is been years that archeologies are trying to find something of the 1st century so this debate will have and end, unfortunately, jerusalem was destroyed by the romans, then by the muslims in the cruzades. etc. and if there is some evidence about the single pole is beneath the city of jerusalem. one more time is not a fact that jesus died on a cross with 2 pieces of wood forming a cross is a possibility not a fact like he could had died in a single post too. Now if you beleive more in historians that in religious liders according to the ngc , Jesus was probably had a ligh scourging, because the romans could had kill him if he could had been flogged more than the ordinary, according to Gibson's movie. He was altmost killed at the spot i think the movie is a litle exagerated it was to much, but i dont beleive too that it was a little flogging, because he can't carried his own patibulum or pole.Now will never know the truth on how Jesus cross was, hopefully some day archeologiest wil find some relics of the first century to confirm that it was a cross or a single pole.

http://www.centuryone.org/crucifixion2.html

Very interesting reading

The facts on crucifixion, stauros, and the "torture stake"

lemans7

peacefulpete

Franz

lemans7

lemans7

Leolaia

lemans7

Kristofer

nowisee

thecarpenter

Share this