Why do JW insist that Christ died on a pole, not a cross?

Question

1. Crucifixion probably began in Persia in the 7th century BC. Alexander the Great used it throughout his campaigns. The Romans adopted it for slaves, rebels and criminals who were not Roman citizens (except for treason).

2. Strong’s word # 4716, the Greek “stauros,” means either pole or cross. But the cross was the device so widely used for centuries before the time of Christ, as well as in Roman times.

So why do JW insist that it’s important to believe that Christ died on a pole, not a cross? And why is the distinction so important to their religion?

(I do understand their argument about bowing down to crosses, etc., but that’s an entirely different issue than how Christ died.)

Cartman, you are at the religion website. If you don't want to hear about religion, go away.

sxanthrop - The more widely accepted is Thayer's Greek Lexicon. Even so, why search out a definition that disagrees with the norm?

But Debbie, I'm working and when I take a break, I come over here and sip my coffee. I can't run out and put my finger in every dike (no jokes please). But I can ask a question and maybe learn something.

Answer 1

Hi CMW,
The crucified did not carry the entire cross to their crucifiction. They only carried the "cross-member" that their hands would be nailed to. The "stake" was secured in the ground and was reused several times rather than placing it in the ground after each person was fastened to it. They have not done the research necessary to understand the scriptures. Have a wonderful week.
Thanks,
Eds

.ALSO...
The JWs want people to think they are the only ones with answers. They have to be right even though they refuse to read, study, and obey GOD's WORD as it is written.
Eds

Answer 2

This is an interesting question, one that I've put much thought and research into.

You are correct that "stauros" means a wooden pole; however, the addition of "cross" to this definition seems to have come later. As you know, JWs seem to universally translate "stauros" as "torture stake," therefore implying that only a single, upright beam was employed. But as you note, this conflicts with historic accounts. (Unfortunately, Josephus' account of the crucifixion doesn't help, since he only uses the word "stauros.")

Ancient accounts of crucifixions document that many of the upright beams or stakes were permanently affixed to a specific place, much like a fence post. (Of course, this only applies to communities where crucifixions were routinely being performed.) In order for such a stake to hold the weight of an average man, it had to be substantial: estimates range between 200 - 300 pounds -- much too heavy for a criminal to carry or drag, especially if he was whipped or beaten first. An alternate method of ensuring the stake remained stationary was the use of a live tree with the branches and bark removed (this makes sense in light of Deut. 21:23 and Gal. 3:13). The convict was then forced to carry or drag the horizontal piece to the tree (or stake). The cross piece would have weighed less than 100 pounds.

To crucify the convict, the arms were stretched as widely as possible, usually dislocating one or both shoulders (so in this aspect, Mel Gibson's portrayal of Jesus' crucifixion was correct; this also corresponds with Psalm 22:14). The person was then brought to his feet and a rope used to pull him to the top of the tree or pole; some executioners used ramp-like structures that the convict walked on, but I'm not sure how often this method was used. The horizontal piece was then fastened through a pre-drilled hole to the tree or stake, using a special iron bar. The feet were separately nailed to a supporting structure, and the crucifixion was complete.

I'm not sure why JWs believe a single-stake crucifixion scenario is so important. It may be that they wish to appear more scholarly than other denominations. However, historic accounts and basic common sense disprove their theory.

EDIT: "Webboffin," your theory cannot be correct in Jesus' case, since John 20:25 tells us one nail for each wrist was used.

Answer 3

... because thats what they were told. Most people, if raised in a religion, will believe whatever it says, very few people explore the possibilites that their doctrine or way of thinking perhpas might be off.
If it is, that doesnt make them horrible or stupid or foolish- it just means that they were taught and believed something incorrect.
Charles T. Russel - who founded the JW - had the bible re-written to his liking. He was afraid of hell, therefore he took that part out (even though Jesus spoke more about that then heaven. so basically - Charlie T was calling Jesus a liar, which if thats true - then no one's saved and we are all in some trouble).
He also changed the doctrines a bit to alter the diety of Christ. He makes Jesus not God in his doctrine, and the brother of lucifer. ( which is like Soooo way not scrpitural, like not even close). So the pole thing .... is not only historically inaccurate (It was ROMAN CRUCIFIXION - always used a crossbeam my friend) - its not even close to what was written. And it had to be a "cross" as that partly fulfilled the prophetic word spoken about the messiah in Jewish history and Law.
Also, charles t russel was heavily into the occult - (which shows he never read leviticus) and he was a racist and a biggot and said that black people were evil and not pure.(which is a load of crap) this guy, (charles T - was totally wacked.) and he rewrote the bible to his liking. their bible is not the same bible most christians use which is like 80% the same as the torah with the exception of the bit on the Son of God.
But JWs believe these things because thats what they were taught. Like all other religions, They are not horrible, evil people because of their personal beliefs.
I think they need to re-evaluate their doctrine so that it is in line with the Word, as - all of the key doctrines they believe are not even close to being scripturally accurate - but thats not their fault. They are super people, just have been lied to on the who God is part. And if they checked the word for themselves, they would see their error.

Answer 4

Because it's TRUE? Most Greek scholars interpet staros as tree or stake.

Romans prefer torture. It hurts worse on a stake than a cross. Hold your hands straight out by your sides. You can breathe normally. Now put your arms straight over your head crossing your hands and stretch. Try to take a deep breath. Now imagine you feet nailed with your knees bent. The only way to take a breath is to push up with your knees. Pain and muscle fatigue soon kick in and you drop, cutting off your breath. A cross might have been nicer. Romans were not nice.

Another reason is fulfillment of prophecy. Israelites had agreed to abide by the Mosaic Law. (Ex. 24: 3) To free all mankind from the curse of the Law because of being Adam's children, Jesus had to die cursed as well. Paul showed this in Galations 3: 10-13. The Law said "Accursed is every man hanged upon a stake (or tree)." Paul is quoting Deuteronomy 21: 23.

Cross worship is of pagan origin. True Christians are to have nothing to do with paganism. We must by command of both Jehovah and Jesus Christ completely avoid pagan teaching and beliefs.

That is why it is so important to us.

Answer 5

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, 1968, 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 book The Non-Christian Cross, by J. D. Parsons (London, 1896), says: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . It is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape.”—Pp. 23, 24; see also The Companion Bible (London, 1885), Appendix No. 162.

Thus the weight of the evidence indicates that Jesus died on an upright stake and not on the traditional cross

Answer 6

If its just a pole why don't catholics make the sign of the pole on their chests? And why the cross sign over churches?

I guess one could study Roman crucifixion techniques - they used it a lot for capital punishment. A single pole would perhaps be easier to put up, but maybe the cross-beam design was quicker at its gruesome task.

Answer 7

Ancient Romans would crucify criminals to stakes of wood. They would lay them out hands directly stretched out above the head and the feet would be nailed below not so stretched out so the feet could support the body.The soldiers would nail the feet and wrists to a beam of wood.

When the stake was put upright into the ground the body weight of the person would push put pressure on the respiratory diaphram as his bodyweight would pull on his arms directly above his head transfering the weight along his torso - causing the breathing to be severly restricted. The only way a person could breathe would be to take the pressure off the chest by pushing his body weight up with the feet. Being as the feet were nailed to the stake this would be excruciatingly painful. The idea of the stake is to cause lingering suffering until death.

For hours Jesus had to hold up his bodyweight on his feet in excruciating pain because of the instinct of the need to breathe is so strong. When the bodies are close to death the romans would break the legs of the crucified to bring to a close the life of the person nailed to the stake. They would effectively suffocate under their own body weight as they could no use their legs to support their weight.

When the roman soldiers broke the legs of the two criminals Jesus was already dead. Jesus being tortured by the beatings and flogging had taken more of it's toll. The romans went that extra mile in torturing the infamous Jesus before they put him on the stake. The false charges against Jesus Christ made him appear a very bad enemy the romans and the stiff necked Pharisees. The terrible abuse he suffered at the hands of his torturers caused his body gave out the first on the stake before the others.

WHY CHRISTENDOM CHURCHES PROMOTE A CROSS AND NOT A TORTURE STAKE?
Below extract —An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 256.

“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"

Answer 8

The truth is, because it is true. PERIOD. Research where the symbol of the Christian cross came from and you will see that it is probably not very pleasing to God. Here are some insights on where that cross originated, and it was way before Christ was put to death...

“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.

“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. 256.

“It is strange, yet unquestionably a fact, that in ages long before the birth of Christ, and since then in lands untouched by the teaching of the Church, the Cross has been used as a sacred symbol. . . . The Greek Bacchus, the Tyrian Tammuz, the Chaldean Bel, and the Norse Odin, were all symbolised to their votaries by a cruciform device.”—The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art (London, 1900), G. S. Tyack, p. 1.

“The cross in the form of the ‘Crux Ansata’ . . . was carried in the hands of the Egyptian priests and Pontiff kings as the symbol of their authority as priests of the Sun god and was called ‘the Sign of Life.’”—The Worship of the Dead (London, 1904), Colonel J. Garnier, p. 226.

“Various figures of crosses are found everywhere on Egyptian monuments and tombs, and are considered by many authorities as symbolical either of the phallus [a representation of the male sex organ] or of coition. . . . In Egyptian tombs the crux ansata [cross with a circle or handle on top] is found side by side with the phallus.”—A Short History of Sex-Worship (London, 1940), H. Cutner, pp. 16, 17; see also The Non-Christian Cross, p. 183.

“These crosses were used as symbols of the Babylonian sun-god, [See book], and are first seen on a coin of Julius Cæsar, 100-44 B.C., and then on a coin struck by Cæsar’s heir (Augustus), 20 B.C. On the coins of Constantine the most frequent symbol is [See book]; but the same symbol is used without the surrounding circle, and with the four equal arms vertical and horizontal; and this was the symbol specially venerated as the ‘Solar Wheel’. It should be stated that Constantine was a sun-god worshipper, and would not enter the ‘Church’ till some quarter of a century after the legend of his having seen such a cross in the heavens.”—The Companion Bible, Appendix No. 162; see also The Non-Christian Cross, pp. 133-141.

Answer 9

Why do we all go over the same old stuff day after day?
There is the end of the world to deal with. Tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, lava flows, heat, darkness, who knows what natural elements Jesus will use to bring about the end. We have been warned to reach out and help save those ones deserving and shake the dust off our feet from those not favorably inclined to listen.
The work is urgent....yet we get bogged down with trivialities.
WAKE UP...get moving . You will die if you just sit there and wait. Have a bible study, find out about the God that can and will save you.

The difference here is a life saving heart operation or a band aid. Lets get ready for the life-threatening emergency and deal with the scratch later.

Answer 10

Why are the Christian determined for it to be a Tau cross instead of the X cross history and archaeology informs us that the Romans used for excecuting state criminals. You don't think it might have anything with the Sol Invictus cult traditions that the early christians usurped do you.