Hey Jehovah's Witnesses, I Know You Can Do It!?

Question

I know you can answer any critical question without resorting to personal attacks, bad science, circular reasoning (Might be too big of a word for ya) and unneedingly quoting the bible on matters that simply can't be answered by the bible.

But will you? You say you have the truth, but let's see if you can defend your idea of the truth logically.

Hey, I'll even give you a simple critical question for you to answer.

Can you prove without a shadow of a doubt that Jesus was crucified on a pole and not on a cross?

I'm waiting for your response. Oh, by the way, I will not be answering any questions from Atchung_Heiss because he's already proven himself to be a blithering troll and it only wastes my time dealing with him.

Answer 1

This question has already been addressed. Hopefully Wester will answer it again here. He does an awesome job at getting it across that it CANNOT be proved that it was a stake. Go to this link and take a peek.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgWZO1AlUQGpsLKeuQDTES3sy6IX?qid=20070108113536AApFTzS&show=7#profile-info-530c3299f65febef45b92beb948593d4aa

Answer 2

I never became a Witness, but I studied with them for quite a while and as a result, I've done a lot of research on the subject of the cross and stake. I believe that the question of whether or not Jesus' death stake had a crosspiece is one that can't be answered with certainty, unless some new archaeological evidence is discovered in the future which may shed some light on the subject.

However, I've noticed that the Imperial Bible Dictionary is often referred to (as above in several places), but the quote is usually edited. For any one who actually wants to read it, here it is - unedited.


CROSS, CRUCIFY. The Greek word for cross, stauros, properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling a piece of ground. But a modification was introduced as the dominion and usages of Rome extended themselves into Greek-speaking countries. Even amongst the Romans, the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole and this always remained the more prominent part. But from the time that it began to be used as an instrument of punishment, a transverse piece of wood was commonly added; not however, always even then. For it would seem that there were more kinds of death than one by the cross; this being sometimes accomplished by transfixing the criminal with a pole, which was run through his back and spine, and came out at his mouth. (Seneca, ep xiv). In another place (Consol ad Marciam xx), Seneca mentions three different forms: “I see” says he “three crosses, not indeed of one sort, but fashioned in different ways; one sort suspending by the head persons bent toward the earth; others transfixing them through their secret parts; others extending their arms on a patibulum.” There can be no doubt, however, that the latter was the most common, and that about the period of the gospel age, crucifixion was usually accomplished by suspending the criminal on a cross piece of wood.

Answer 3

So personal attacks are undesirable? Gotcha.


The plain answer is....
No. Jehovah's Witnesses teach that the so-called "cross" was likely a simply "stake", but they do not pretend that this teaching is a certainty.

Of course the Romans had the ability to create a cross, and probably did. But ask yourself: why they would have bothered when a simple stake would have worked just as well or better?

The bible most assuredly does NOT offer any proof that the stake was actually a cross of two intersecting beams. The actual facts of the bible may be enlightening to examine...

You may be interested to see how your own copy of the bible translates Acts 5:30, Galatians 3:13, Deuteronomy 21:22, 23, and Acts 10:39. The King James, Revised Standard, Dyaglott, and Jerusalem Bible translate the instrument of Christ's death simply as "stake" or "tree" because the original wording simply does not support the idea that this was more than a piece of upright wood.

It is also eye-opening to examine how the first-century Christians felt about idols of any kind, much less one that glorified an instrument of death.

Answer 4

It cannot be proven conclusively whether Jesus did or did not die on a cross. I would suggest calling the Watchtower Society and ask them this question: “Do we know conclusively that Jesus did not die on a cross? “ I would be surprised if the answer
was “Yes.”

There is too much irrelevant and inaccurate information to address,, but I will just say this:

The November 22, 1976 Awake admits that the word “stauros” is used to describe crosses.

In the first century, Seneca wrote that he saw three stauroses, fashioned in different ways. They were not all the same.

The Imperial Bible Dictionary is often quoted to support the idea that Jesus died on a stake, not a cross. In truth, however, the Imperial Bible Dictionary says that criminals were most commonly suspended on crosses during the time of Jesus. I have never seen anyone quote this part of the text. It is always left out, as is the statement of Seneca. (Pages 84 and 85).

Yes, it is Christian tradition that says that Jesus died on a cross. A tradition that was accepted by Christians dating back - that we know of - to nearly the time of the apostles. A very old tradition - not just oral, but written down in early Christian writings which are often referred to by the Watchtower Society.

One such writing, the Letter of Barnabas, says that Jesus died on a cross. According to the April 8, 1987 Awake, this Letter was written by an early Christian between 100-132 CE. (The apostle John is thought to have died around the year 100. Again...tradition.) The article tells us that these men were not inspired as the Bible writers were, but their comments are of interest, because they reflect the thinking of the time.

The Watchtower publication “All Scripture is Inspired of God and Beneficial” makes frequent references to these early written traditions, usually as proof that the early Christians accepted a particular Bible book as inspired. For example, this same tradition says that Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews. It's TRADITION, not the Bible, that says Paul wrote Hebrews.

Believing that it’s possible that Jesus died on a stake with a crossbar doesn’t make one an idolator.

Answer 5

Now listen...any person who has their beliefs & very GOD challenged can respond angrily. One shouldn't do that but it is only human nature. As 1 of your answerers said above, WE do not retaliate as a whole. You can think logically about it. As a whole, we do not retaliate. Maybe some who claim 2 be witnesses do & the way they speak might not seem as a Witness should. But you have a brain...use it. If they CLEARLY do not follow what We teach, then they probably are not in good standing or not even technically a witness. But most of us who claim we are are. As far as personal attacks? That's an oxymoron coming from pple. who say we're a cult. You're obviously NOT interested in truth....You're interested in provoking us & bringing Jehovah's name down in front of pple. This is why we sometimes have to defend the truth as we do. And to answer your question. Let's think LOGICALLY, shall we? ALL mankind has to go on is the Bible. YOU show ME in ANY Bible where it says He was impaled on a cross. I can show you in ours, Catholics, Protestans, LSD, & every other Bible there is that it repeatedly mentions "TORTURE STAKE.' "Stake" as in an upright pole. By asking questions like this, ALL you do is instigate things & You KNOW it! We can go in a million circles by talking about these things over Yahoo. One must sit DOWN & study if he is sto learn the truth. Becuz all you do is ask the same questions over/over/over again & we need to explain things more deeply. So...I answered your question (I'll wait 4 an email regarding where you can prove Jesus died on a cross), I didn't attack you, curse you out (As we never do), & ONE more thing just to show others what a farce you & your questions are...you said WE attack/insult YOU...IF EVERYONE MAY LOOK....IN HIS QUESTION, HE (IN PARENTHESES) INSULTS/ATTACKS US BY STATING "CIRCULAR REASONING" MAY BE TOO BIG A WORD FOR US. BASICALLY SAYING THAT WE'RE STUPID. There's hypocritical for ya....

Answer 6

Hello there I will answer your question not because I wish an argument from you, but because there may be others who read this site, and they may actually learn something, I can tell by the attitute of your question that you are not really interested in learning. In Classical Greek, the word for torture stake, which by the way the Christian Greek Scriptures were written, is stauros the word meant and "upright stake" or "upright pole" something anything could be hung on or even used for impaling. Even the Romans the word 'crux' originally meant an upright pole. { The Imperial Bible Dictionary - Edited by P. Fairbairn, London, 1874, Vol 1. page 376

Answer 7

Thought you were going to create a stumbling point for JWs?

One day you may learn that JWs are taught the Bible as a whole, and not just from the NWT. They are also all taught the history behind beliefs, including the development of JW beliefs, as well as Interlinear Greek translations, which can be bought at any Bible Book Store. Every witness follows the teachings of Paul who said to continually taking in accurate knowledge.

There are those witnesses who are not as good as others at it, just as there are students who are better at math than others, but they at least try. The same cannot be said for other religions, with the possible exception of some Jewish Sects.

Still cross or not, why venerate an instrument of torture and death of ones Savior? If you need it to re-enforce your faith, than perhaps you didn't have faith to begin with. If it is for showing to the world that you are Christian, that can be done by your manner and dependence on proper Christian values, just as JW do. That is why it is easy to spot a JW in a crowd, not because they carry around a symbol of their faith, but because their faith glows in them.

Answer 8

I will try to keep it short (no circular reasoning) and rather than quote scriptures I will refer to the meaning behind the words used in the scriptures. Here we go:

Most Bible translations say Christ was “crucified” rather than “impaled.” This is because of the common belief that the torture instrument upon which he was hung was a “cross” made of two pieces of wood instead of a single pale, or stake.

Tradition, not the Scriptures, also says that the condemned man carried only the crossbeam of the cross, called the patibulum, or antenna, instead of both parts. In this way some try to avoid the predicament of having too much weight for one man to drag or carry to Golgotha.

Yet, what did the Bible writers themselves say about these matters? They used the Greek noun stau·ros′ 27 times and the verbs stau·ro′o 46 times, syn·stau·ro′o (the prefix syn, meaning “with”) 5 times, and a·na·stau·ro′o (a·na′, meaning “again”) once. They also used the Greek word xy′lon, meaning “wood,” 5 times to refer to the torture instrument upon which Jesus was nailed.

Stau·ros′ in both the classical Greek and Koine carries no thought of a “cross” made of two timbers. It means only an upright stake, pale, pile, or pole, as might be used for a fence, stockade, or palisade.

Says Douglas’ New Bible Dictionary of 1985 under “Cross,” page 253: “The Gk. word for ‘cross’ (stauros; verb stauroo . . . ) means primarily an upright stake or beam, and secondarily a stake used as an instrument for punishment and execution.”

Guess it could have been shorter, but I wanted to be thorough.

Answer 9

Let me begin this by saying, it doesn't really matter what he died on, why would you use idolatry in Christian worship? The point is that he died for our sins.
Many Bible translations do use the word “cross.” But what word did the original Bible writers use? There are two Greek words used for the executional instrument on which Christ died—staurós and xýlon. The authoritative Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible gives as the primary meaning for staurós “a stake or post,” and for xýlon “timber,” “tree” or “wood.” The New Bible Dictionary says: “The Gk. word for ‘cross’ (staurós, verb stauróo) means primarily an upright stake or beam, and secondarily a stake used as an instrument for punishment and execution.”
The Latin word used for the instrument on which Christ died was crux which, according to Livy, a famous Roman historian of the first century C.E., means a mere stake. The Cyclopædia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature says that the crux simplex was a “mere stake ‘of one single piece without transom [crossbar].’”
In confirmation of this, appendix No. 162 of The Companion Bible states concerning staurós that it “denotes an upright pale or stake, to which the criminals were nailed for execution. . . . It never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle, but always of one piece alone.” (Italics theirs.) The appendix concludes: “The evidence is thus complete, that the Lord was put to death upon an upright stake, and not on two pieces of timber placed at any angle.”
With its roots in ancient pagandom(the cross was around for centuries before Christ), and the evidence that Christ was not impaled on the traditional cross, nor did the early Christians use such a symbol, one is led to this conclusion: The cross is not really Christian.
If Christ were to be put to death today, would you wear a symbol of the electric chair on your neck?
More?
“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 (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 25
“Various objects, dating from periods long anterior to the Christian era, have been found, marked with crosses of different designs, in almost every part of the old world. India, Syria, Persia and Egypt have all yielded numberless examples . . . The use of the cross as a religious symbol in pre-Christian times and among non-Christian peoples may probably be regarded as almost universal, and in very many cases it was connected with some form of nature worship.”—Encyclopædia Britannica (1946), Vol. 6, p. 753

Answer 10

can you ask a question without resorting to personal attacks?

That's a good question, was Jesus Christ crucified on a pole or a cross. Well, if it was a pole, where did he put his arms?