Cross or stake: Is anyone familiar with this quote? Was "xylon" the Greek word used for "piece of wood"?

Question

" The men ordered to lead the slave to his punishment, having stretched out both his arms and fastened them to a piece of wood which extended across his breast and shoulders as far as his wrists, followed him, tearing his naked body with whips."-- Dionysius of Halacarnassus, written around 7 BC

Obviously the first three answerers didn't read the question or don't know the answer. I would really like to know the answer to the question, so if you aren't familiar with the quote, don't answer at all.

Please DO answer if you have any historical or linguistic information about this quotation.

TeeM
Thanks for at least acknowledging the question I asked.

I'm only going to address the first point you raised, which is that a pole with a crossbar is never spoken of as a pole unless someone adds the word "utility". You know that's not true. People often speak of a pole , such as "I backed into a pole" without specifying that it was a flagpole, a telephone pole, a utility pole, or whatever. Furthermore, since some utility poles have crossbars and some don't, the addition of the word 'utility' would not indicate whether there was a crossbar or not.

If you insist on such a narrow interpretation of the word 'stauros' , why doesn't the NWT translate it as "stake"? They never do; they always add the word "torture" to "stake which shows that the translators recognized the secondary meaning of 'stauros' .A stake on which criminals were affixed. There was no other word in Greek that was used to describe stakes with crosspieces; it was always 'stauros'.

The secondary meaning of stauros - a stake or other wooden instrument of punishment - includes crosses. The secondary meaning which is the ONLY meaning used in the New Testament is not about the shape, but about the usage - torture, punishment, severity.
The word that corresponds to it in Latin - crux - has the same root as the word "cruel", and denotes severity or cruelty.

If you have to pick ONE English word to describe a wooden torture instrument, the word "cross" is well-suited. Unfortunately, the word "cross" also describes a shape and not all stauroses were in the shape of a cross. But some were.

It's not important to me that Jesus died on a cross; I'm not convinced that he did. But it's important to me to counteract all the inaccurate and one-sided information that people - mostly JW's - put forth as answers on this subject. I don't like to see people misled.

TeeM,

I'm not going to argue over whether it's mandatory to add another word to "pole" every time you speak of a pole that has anything attached to it. I believe it's optional.

I'm interested in what you said about Livy. I'm not familiar with anything he said that would limit the word "crux" to a plain stake only. What exactly did he say? And could you tell me where I could read what he said? Is it on the internet?

I'm especially interested because just yesterday I read on the internet that Livy referred six times to a crux , but in none of those cases revealed any information as to the nature of the crux. (Packards Concordance). He did refer to a stake, however, with the words "deligati ad palum". Palum appears to be related to 'palus' which I understand is another word for stake and seems to be related to the word used in Luke 19:43.

I agree that a crux was often a plain stake, but please share what info you have about Livy. I'm willing to learn. Are you?

Thanks. If you find any relevant information by Livy, please post it.

Tell me this, if you know. I don't know this for sure, but I've always understood that terms like 'crux immissa" and "crux compacta", etc. are terms that were developed in later centuries after crucifixion was discontinued, to specify different shaped crosses. But at the time crosses were used, the term was simply "crux". Is that how you understand it? I can't read Latin, but the OLD quotations I've found usually say cruci, but not those other words.

Also, do you know if a xylon (in Greek) was the same as patibulo (in Latin)?

Also, are you aware that the Letter of Barnabas was written very soon after the time of the apostles ?. Chap. 9:7-8 says "because the cross (stauros) was destined to have grace in the T".....obviously meaning that a stauros (at least some of them) were shaped like a T. ? So how could we know for sure it wasn't a cross? Wouldn't people have known if only stakes were used?

Answer 1

Sorry I don't know the answer to this question.

I did want to answer your 'utility pole' question and found it closed.

To turn a simple 'pole' into a pole with cross members you have to add the word 'utility' to it.

By adding the word utility to it, it is no longer a simple pole but an expanded pole used for utilities.

To clarify stauros and make it a 'cross' you have to also add clarifying words.

Side point 2:

Wolfgang Feneberg comments in the Jesuit magazine Entschluss/Offen (April 1985): “He [Jesus] did not withhold his father’s name YHWH from us, but he entrusted us with it. It is otherwise inexplicable why the first petition of the Lord’s Prayer should read: ‘May your name be sanctified!’”

Feneberg further notes that “in pre-Christian manuscripts for Greek-speaking Jews, God’s name was not paraphrased with kýrios [Lord], but was written in the tetragram form [YHWH] in Hebrew or archaic Hebrew characters. . . .

We find recollections of the name in the writings of the Church Fathers;"
=================

Here is a second source of Jehovah's name being found in 1 st century Christian 'Church Fathers' writings.

A comment about your question is:

Yes the Romans did use 'crosses' to execute people.

---------
Why, according to the History Channel,

'because it is long slow painful death taking DAYS to die.'

'even breaking the legs of those hung on a cross, didn't speed up death, but made that slow death more painful.'

-----------
Jesus and the two that were hung with him had to die in less than 8 hours, not days.

In order to accomplish this, the hands had to be directly above the head.

When the legs are broken in this position, The person dies within a very short period of time.

Why is dying on a cross so important to you?

edit ---------


Thanks for responding.

I don't believe people use 'pole' as all inclusive.

People I know do say 'I ran into that flag pole, utility pole, fishing pole, etc.

I also think 'cross' is the narrow translation to stauros and not 'torture stake' which is generic enough to include 'cross' if that was used, whereas 'cross' is very specfic, especially if that was not the stake used.

Again from my research, to make stauros a cross you have to add to the discription, such as 'utility' or 'telephone' and even then as you said, that does make the stake / pole a cross.

So I find your arguements proof for my answers.

Even in Latin, crux basiclly meant 'stake' not 'cross'

In the writings of Livy, a Roman historian of the first century B.C., crux means a mere stake.

To make crux a cross notice what you have to add,

the crux commissa, which was shaped like the letter “T”;

the crux decussata, which was shaped like the letter “X,” and

the crux immissa, which was like the letter “T” but with the crossbar lowered.

These added words become your 'utility' pole.

Are you also saying the 'History Channel' is wrong about the length of time it takes to die on a cross?


edit 2.

I've so far many quotes that echo the WT comment I used concerning Livy. but not the exact quote.

I did find this:

C.Forms of Crucifixion

Generally the victims were crucified alive; at times it was a matter of displaying the corpse of someone already executed in another way. Polycrates of Samos exemplifies the latter case. He was treacherously seized by the Persian satrap Oroites, killed "in an unspeakably cruel way," and his body fastened to a stake (Hdt. 3.125.3). Whether living or already dead, the victims suffered a degrading loss of all dignity by being bound or nailed to a stake. Herodotus offers a few details when reporting the way the satrap Artayctes was crucified by the Athenians at the Hellespont: "They nailed him to planks and hung him there. And they stoned Artayctes' son before his eyes" (9.120). Normally ancient writers were reluctant to describe particular crucifixions in much detail.

Under the Roman Empire, crucifixion normally included a flogging beforehand. At times the cross was only one vertical stake. Frequently, however, there was a cross-piece attached either at the top to give the shape of a "T" (crux commissa )or just below the top, as in the form most familiar in Christian sybolism (crux immissa). The victims carried the cross or at least the cross-beam (patibulum) to the place of execution, where they were stripped and bound or nailed to the beam, raised up, and seated on a sedile or small wooden peg in the up-right beam.Ropes bound the shoulders or torso to the cross. The feet or heels of the victim were bound or nailed to the upright satke. As xrucifixion damaged no vital organs, death could come slowly, sometimes after days of atrocious pain. See also IDBSup, 199-200.

Executioners could vary the form of punish ment, as Seneca the Younger indicates: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet" (Dial. 6 [Com. Marc.) 20.3). In his account of what happened to Jewish fugitives from Jerusalem, Josephus also lets us see that there was no fixed pattern for crucifying people. Much depended on the sadistic ingenuity of the moment.

Another source.

Crux composita Stipes and patibulum
Crux humilis Low cross
Crux sublimis Tall cross
Crux commissa T-shaped (Tau) cross
Crux immissa V-shaped (Latin) cross
Crux capitata V-shaped (Latin) cross
Crux decussata X-shaped cross



I'll keep looking. Everything I've found shows that crux like stauros by itself basically means 'Stake' not cross.

I have found much confusion as to the meaning of cruxifcation. (sp). Most people assume this meand 'to die on a cross' which is also a latter meaning of the word.
,

Answer 2

An important reason is that 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. (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24) 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.

There is no evidence that for the first 300 years after Christ’s death, those claiming to be Christians used the cross in worship. In the fourth century, however, pagan Emperor Constantine became a convert to apostate Christianity and promoted the cross as its symbol. Whatever Constantine’s motives, the cross had nothing to do with Jesus Christ. The cross is, in fact, pagan in origin. The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “The cross is found in both pre-Christian and non-Christian cultures.” Various other authorities have linked the cross with nature worship and pagan sex rites.

Why, then, was this pagan symbol promoted? Apparently, to make it easier for pagans to accept “Christianity.” Nevertheless, devotion to any pagan symbol is clearly condemned by the Bible. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18) The Scriptures also forbid all forms of idolatry. (Exodus 20:4, 5; 1 Corinthians 10:14) With very good reason, therefore, true Christians do not use the cross in worship.

Answer 3

In Koine Greek, there is not any indefinite article ("a"); within the absence of a sure article ("the") an indefinite article is customarily rightly assumed, however whilst there is not any sure article in entrance of "God" in John a million:a million, we should not count on an indefinite article. The textual content reads actually: "?? ???? ?? ? ?????, ??? ? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????, ??? ???? ?? ? ?????." In commencing was once the phrase and the phrase was once with the God, and God was once the phrase. John has performed a well task of setting up this sentence in order that he each publicizes Christ to be God whilst additionally declaring that Christ and the Father don't seem to be the equal man or woman. Had he mentioned that the phrase was once THE God, with a sure article, he could have known as Jesus and the Father absolutely the equal, which we all know isn't the case. But if they are not the equal, why now not name "the phrase" (Jesus) yet another god? Look on the moment clause in particular (??? ???? ?? ? ?????. - and God was once the phrase.) Note that John has placed God, now not the phrase, on the commencing of the clause. This is how a speaker of Koine further emphasis to a phrase, as though to underline it. So John is emphasizing Jesus' Godhood whilst nonetheless keeping apart his personhood from the daddy, now not making a polytheistic plurality of Gods. Had he switched the order and placed "a god" on the finish of the clause, then the indefinite article assumption could had been a little bit extra fair. The context of the entire of scripture must be an sufficient advisor to reply the query nevertheless, as there is just one God, and there might be no legit "a god." The NWT additionally makes many seen interpretive mistakes and must now not be relied on frequently. For instance, it erroneously inserts Jehovah whenever the Greek evidently says "lord." This demonstrates the seen biases of the translators in prefer of a particular theological view.

Answer 4

stake, the same Jesus told that he would die in an stake John 3:14 and numbers 21:7, the serpent was raised in an stake or pole and Jesus will be killed in the same way.

Answer 5

stake,cross came later in time