JWs answer this question about the stake/cross debate. See details for full question.?

Question

JWs, if as you claim stauros is properly translated "stake/torture stake" what would have been the correct Greek word to use if Jesus had died on a cross?

Answer 1

The correct - and only - word would have been stauros.

Nov 22, 1976 WT Page 27 quotes the Imperial Bible Dictionary which says that the Greek word for cross is stauros. It also acknowledges that both the Greek 'stauros' and the Latin 'crux' were used to refer to crosses, which is made obvious from the context of the writings.

TeeM

Why did you ignore the secondary meaning of stauros on the website you looked at: A stake for impaling. Perhaps you should look at some other dictionaries - or maybe you did - that made it plain that a stauros was a stake OR any wooden instrument of execution to which criminals were fastened.

Gee, I wonder how it is that Justin Martyr described a cross by using the Greek word stauros and he wasn't even around in the 3rd century. He had been martyred before that time. I guess he forgot to read the dictionary and didn't know he couldn't use "stauros".

Answer 2

Stauros.

"Stauros" included all kinds of torture stakes, those that were simple stakes and those with refinements such as a crosspiece.

Edit

cathorsec

anastauroo is not a very different word at all. Its root is the same as stauros. It's a combination of ana, meaning "again" and stauroo which is the verb form of stauros

Hebrews 6:6 uses the word anastauroo. Please read it for yourself.

Edit again

TeeM

Why don't you do some more research? The Epistle of Barnabas was written at the end of the first or beginning of the second century and the writer used "stauros" to describe a cross.

I've never seen or heard of anyone in the early writings adding that phrase you mentioned when talking about crucifying someone on a cross. They used "stauros" in Greek and "crux" in Latin, whether you want to admit it or not.

Answer 3

The way you word things makes it hard to understand what you mean. The ransom was needed to clear up sin, I'm sure you know this. Who other than Christ was sinless? I know I'm not perfect & am a sinner. (Romans 5:12) That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned. Adam and Eve were created perfect, they sinned and no babies were born inside the Garden of Eden or before the sin took place. We all have sin, therefore Jesus died for us to gain everlasting life as Adam was to have in the first place. I'm sure you already know the Scripture in Genesis that says there was also the tree of life that they could eat from at all times and live forever. They were put out of the Garden so they would not eat from it after they sinned. You also know that JW's believe that the Christ is the Messiah and died for mankind's sins. Jesus was perfect the entire time he was on earth. When was he not? "what kind of death acquits from sin" Dead is dead, without life, that is dead. Remember that Jesus did raise Lazarus from the dead but he was resurrected back to an imperfect world with Satan still around. After Armageddon when the Resurrection happens, Satan and his demons will be gone and there will be a great teaching work being done without him being around. Those that don't know Jehovah God will have that time to come to know Him.

Answer 4

I would believe that the use of cross in worship did not start until emperor constantines day when he wanted to unite pagans and christians via religion. The hebrews did quote the mosaic law which simply used the hebrew word for tree or stake during the trial of christ. I know the account of Thomas wanting to put his fingers in the holes in christs hands and not wrists as the WTBTS portrays is also evidence that they are wrong unless they contend that the same word in greek applies . They also use the word impale over crussify in which case there is more argument to be made of the translation. A very tuff argument.

Answer 5

There are quite a few misinformed answers here. The word STAUROS in the NT had nothing to do with a religious symbol. It referred to the apparatus the Romans used to execute people on, the shape of which varied considerably but since the third century BC frequently included a patibulum, or crosspiece (see Plautus). The Romans did not execute people on symbols. The use of a shape of intersecting lines as a religious symbol is quite a different matter from a form of capital punishment. The meaning of the word had little to do with the shape of the instrument than its FUNCTION, i.e. an apparatus on which people were nailed to or bound to while still alive. Seneca in the first century AD in particular talked about the various forms to which the CRUX (the Latin equivalent of STAUROS) took, one of which incorporated the patibulum. This was probably the most common form of crucifixion, as literary sources indicate. Lucian in particular referred to the Greek letter Tau as the shape that tyrants took to construct devices to execute people, and which also supplied the name of the device (i.e. STAUROS, which has TAU in its name). Another Greek writier, Ardemidorus, likened the STAUROS on which people are nailed to the mast of a sailing vessel, which includes a yardarm. An early second century AD Christian source, the Epistle of Barnabas (while is really an anonymous homily), also compared the STAUROS to the Greek letter Tau. It is simply not true that STAUROS did not refer to two-beamed crosses until the time of Constantine, and that this was through the use of a "pagan religious symbol". The word referred to a kind of execution practiced by the Romans which frequently incorporated crossbeams (as sources from the second century BC onward show), and sources long before Constantine indicate a similar shape.

It is important to understand however that the word did not MEAN a particular kind of shape. That was not part of the meaning per se, at least at first. It just so happened that the form of the STAUROS usually included a second beam, which had its own term in Latin (patibulum). The word referred to crucifixion in all its forms, which varied according to the ingenuity of the executioner. Crucifixion was certainly also done at times without a patibulum. Whether one was used in the case of Jesus does not rest on word meanings alone. Rather, positive evidence of the use of a patibulum would be found in such places as NT references to cross-bearing, which almost certainly refers to the kind of patibulum-bearing that Greek and Latin sources frequently mention.

Whoever made a reference to "Tammuz" needs to check their sources. This notion, present in Watchtower literature, comes from long-discredited Alexander Hislop and has no basis in reality.

The answer by amorromantico02 is an article published by the Watchtower Society in the 1984 Reference Edition of the New World Translation. It contains two significant misstatements. It claims that Lucian in Prometheus I used the verbal form of STAUROS to mean a simple tying or fastening, as to a stake. It also claims that Livy used the Latin equivalent CRUX to mean "a mere stake". Both statements are incorrect. Lucian in Prometheus I uses STAUROS to refer to a nailing of Prometheus with arms outstreatched across, with each arm nailed by a separate nail. Also Livy DID NOT use the word CRUX to specifically denote a simple stake. None of his uses of the word describe the form of the CRUX. See documentation in the following article: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/92381/1.ashx

Answer 6

Interesting question.

Since the bible doesn't use the word for cross in the death of Jesus, it is not in Strongs.

I'm going to have to do more research.

Thanks.

Edit: =====

This is what I found.

There is no single word for cross in Greek with reference to what Jesus died on.

According to most dictionaries,

Cross is "stauros, as upright stake"

http://colet.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/chuck/woodhouse_pages.pl?page_num=185

So even when they try to make stauros mean cross, it doesn't.

To turn it in to a cross as we know, you have to add the words 'εγκάρσια δοκός' which means 'cross joist'

http://www2.worldlingo.com/en/products_services/worldlingo_translator.html

From what I could find: There was no single word for cross in Jesus' day.

stauros didn't come to mean 'cross' 3rd to 4th centuries A.D.

(1 Corinthians 4:6) 6 Now, brothers, these things I have transferred so as to apply to myself and A·pol′los for YOUR good, that in our case YOU may learn the [rule]: “Do not go beyond the things that are written,” in order that YOU may not be puffed up individually in favor of the one against the other.

To make stauros mean cross you have to go beyond what is written.

Answer 7

Hi there.

With all due respect, it actually makes little or no difference whether the Lord Jesus Christ died on a cross or a stake. The important thing is that He sacrificed Himself to pay the penalty for our sins, and that through faith in His sin-atoning death and resurrection, TRUE Christians are FREELY justified in God's sight, as the Bible teaches (see Romans 3:23 - 26, for example).

The fact that organisations such as the Watchtower spend so much time with theological hair-splitting on issues such as this is symptomatic of the cult mentality, which often majors on minors. Straining out gnats, and swallowing camels...

Ephesians 2:8 & 9.

Blessings to you, Carl.

Answer 8

Ironically, pro-cross activists seem to ignore the fact that they actually do believe that Christ was impaled on a stake, albeit a stake with a crossbeam ("patibulum") attached.

It seems ironic also that the Greek term "stauros" was used to refer to either a plain or crossed stake, and the Latin term "crux" was used to refer to either a plain or crossed stake, and the English term "torture stake" can be used to refer to either a plain or crossed stake. Yet, pro-cross activists seem intent on shouting down any possibility other than a cherished but unsupportable tradition.

True Christians (such as Jehovah's Witnesses) do not behave in such a "brainwashed" manner, and in fact true Christians (such as Jehovah's Witnesses) spend little time arguing about the exact shape of Christ's instrument of impalement. As true disciples of Christ, Jehovah's Witnesses do not distract from his message of the good news by going around denouncing the worshipful use of the cross and other idols. Instead, Witnesses believe that the bible plainly forbids idolatry of any kind, including the worshipful use of icons such as crucifixes.
http://watchtower.org/bible/1jo/chapter_005.htm?bk=1jo;chp=5;vs=21;citation#bk21
http://www.watchtower.org/bible/ac/chapter_017.htm?bk=ac;chp=17;vs=29;citation#bk29

(1 John 5:21) Guard yourselves from idols.

(Acts 17:29) We ought not to imagine that the Divine Being is like gold or silver or stone, like something sculptured by the art and contrivance of man


The exact shape of Christ's instrument of death is hardly a central doctrine of the faith, but Jehovah's Witnesses do happen to believe that Jesus was almost certainly impaled on a simple stake, rather than a cross of two intersecting beams. 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. The English word "cross" is an imprecise translation of the Latin word "crux". Note this image of crucifixion performed with a "crux simplex", such as seems to have been used to execute Jesus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Justus_Lipsius_Crux_Simplex_1629.jpg

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.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/200604a/article_01.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/20050508a/article_01.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/rq/index.htm?article=article_11.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/19960715/article_01.htm

Answer 9

Interesting question. The Watchtower Society uses Vines to indicate that Stauros did not mean cross in the first century. However this is incorrect, as there is ample evidence that Stauros did mean cross in Jesus day and that Jesus did die on a cross.

Jehovah's Witnesses would do well to read the information at http://jehovah.net.au/stake.html as this shows why the Watchtower reasoning is incorrect, and have misquoted sources in an attempt to justify their incorrect position.

Answer 10

first Jesus himself told that he would die in and stake (John 3:14 and Numbers 21:7) the problem is not the word is the symbol that is pagan, the cross could be called "PAPA" but the symbol cross is a pagan symbol, that represent Tammuz God, and means the male´s sexual organ.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=9&version=68

Luke 9:23 "σταυρον" stauros