English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

40 answers

Cross: Jesus did not die on a cross. He died on a pole, or a stake. The Greek word translated "cross" in many Bibles meant just one piece of timber. The symbol of the cross comes from ancient false religions. The cross was not used or worshiped by the early Christians. Therefore, do you think it would be right to use a cross in worship?—Deuteronomy 7:26; 1 Corinthians 10:14.

2006-10-09 13:10:42 · answer #1 · answered by Ancho 2 · 3 0

If he existed at all, he wasnt killed on cross, but crucified on a wooden apparatus to facilitate the splaying and tieing of a body in an upright position, then to be taken as a religious icon. The apparatus saw no religious significance for the thousands of other criminals (political, and domesic) who either died, or were let go, after the feat, for the centuries before. Jesus if existing in reality, may have died, or, may have lived, the hands were often nailed, not going through a critical vien. There is evidence there was bodily support, at the feet, and death by crucifiction, was more a political spectical, than a reality of demise. The attendant guards, once the crowd had gone, and political values were upheld, had thier own scource of income!

2006-10-09 13:18:17 · answer #2 · answered by ben b 5 · 0 1

The King James Bible says Jesus was put to death on a tree.

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
Acts 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.
Galatians 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

Michelangelo and the Cross

Italian government art experts are said to be “90 percent sure” that a sculpture recently found in a monastery in Lebanon is the work of the famous Italian artist Michelangelo. The small wooden carving is said to be worth $2.5 million (U.S.) if it actually is Michelangelo’s work. According to an Associated Press report, “the figure is unusual because it represents Christ with his hands stretched out above his head instead of to the side, as he usually is depicted on the cross.”

Whether the wooden sculpture is the work of the 16th-century artist Michelangelo or not, it illustrates that the impalement of Christ on a cross frame has not always been so certain as Christendom’s leaders today would have people believe. For example, the 16th-century Roman Catholic scholar Justus Lipsius illustrated impalement on an upright stake in his book “De Cruce Liber Primus.” This fits the meaning of the Greek word used in the Bible to describe the impalement of Christ, “stauros”, which “denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake.”, “An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

Jesus Christ did not die on a cross. The Greek word generally translated “cross” is stau·ros'. It basically means “an upright pale or stake.” The Companion Bible points out: “[Stau·ros'] never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle . . . There is nothing in the Greek of the [New Testament] even to imply two pieces of timber.”

In several texts, Bible writers use another word for the instrument of Jesus’ death. It is the Greek word xy'lon. This word simply means “timber” or “a stick, club, or tree.”

Explaining why a simple stake was often used for executions, the book Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung (The Cross and the Crucifixion), by Hermann Fulda, states: “Trees were not everywhere available at the places chosen for public execution. So a simple beam was sunk into the ground. On this the outlaws, with hands raised upward and often also with their feet, were bound or nailed.”

The most convincing proof of all, however, comes from God’s Word. The apostle Paul says: “Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us, because it is written: ‘Accursed is every man hanged upon a stake [“a tree,” King James Version].’” (Galatians 3:13) Here Paul quotes Deuteronomy 21:22, 23, which clearly refers to a stake, not a cross. Since such a means of execution made the person “a curse,” it would not be proper for Christians to decorate their homes with images of Christ impaled.

2006-10-09 13:45:11 · answer #3 · answered by BJ 7 · 2 0

It was called a stake but is also referred to as a cross.

2006-10-09 13:09:50 · answer #4 · answered by Rena 3 · 0 1

short and to the factor: confident Jesus replaced into killed on a stake (on the instant pole like wood piece) not a bypass. human beings have mentioned that for hundreds of years, its only that the religion needs to proceed making use of the bypass thought, so as that they make money off the item... etc. at present BBC ran a documentary the place they say that Jesus hands ought to not have been so a strategies aside, using fact this is bodily impossible to stay like that for the time that Jesus replaced into. So even they are recognizing that this would possibly not be genuine.

2016-10-19 02:48:24 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

it was a stake .. there is scientific reasoning behind this i will try to explain without pics it is kinda hard ... if you were hung on a cross you could stay like that for a very long time .. where as if you are on a stake eventually your muscles will give out an cause you to suffocate

2006-10-09 13:10:59 · answer #6 · answered by Tupperware Lady 1 · 2 0

Cross

2006-10-09 13:09:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

What an odd question. You must be the only person on the planet that doesn't know that Jesus died on a cross. Anyway, the important thing to know is that He died in our place, for our sins that we could be forgiven by God. He didn't stay dead, either, but rose again!!!!

2006-10-09 20:38:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Historians think the Romans were partial to T-shaped crosses. I've also heard theories that support X-shaped crosses. Personally, I don't think it matters. Crucified is crucified. It's a horrible way to die.

2006-10-09 13:10:38 · answer #9 · answered by vita64 5 · 0 0

A torture stake.

The Greek word rendered “cross” in many modern Bible versions (“torture stake” in NW) is stau·ros′. In classical Greek, this word meant merely an upright stake, or pale. Later it also came to be used for an execution stake having a crosspiece. The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·ros′], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.

Was that the case in connection with the execution of God’s Son?
It is noteworthy that the Bible also uses the word xy′lon to identify the device used. A Greek-English Lexicon, by Liddell and Scott, defines this as meaning: “Wood cut and ready for use, firewood, timber, etc. . . . piece of wood, log, beam, post . . . cudgel, club . . . stake on which criminals were impaled . . . of live wood, tree.” It also says “in NT, of the cross,” and cites Acts 5:30 and 10:39 as examples. (Oxford, pp. 1191, 1192) However, in those verses KJ, RS, JB, and Dy translate xy′lon as “tree.” (Compare this rendering with Galatians 3:13; Deuteronomy 21:22, 23.)

“The shape of the [two-beamed cross] had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the cross of Christ.”—An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

Is veneration of the cross a Scriptural practice?

1 Cor. 10:14: “My beloved ones, flee from idolatry.” (An idol is an image or symbol that is an object of intense devotion, veneration, or worship.)

Ex. 20:4, 5, JB: “You shall not make yourself a carved image or any likeness of anything in heaven or on earth beneath or in the waters under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them.” (Notice that God commanded that his people not even make an image before which people would bow down.)

Of interest is this comment in the New Catholic Encyclopedia: “The representation of Christ’s redemptive death on Golgotha does not occur in the symbolic art of the first Christian centuries. The early Christians, influenced by the Old Testament prohibition of graven images, were reluctant to depict even the instrument of the Lord’s Passion.”—Vol. IV, p. 486.

Concerning first-century Christians, History of the Christian Church says: “There was no use of the crucifix and no material representation of the cross.”—(New York, 1897), J. F. Hurst, Vol. I, p. 366.

2006-10-09 13:16:16 · answer #10 · answered by New ♥ System ♥ Lady 4 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers