The Cross

Originally posted by RJHinds
They also replaced "cross" with 'torture stake" in their New World Translation.

Actually we translated the Greek term 'stauros', as torture stake because we found no evidence that it was anything other than a crux simplex. If you have any evidence which points either directly or indirectly to it being the shape of a tau cross then please produce it now.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Actually we translated the Greek term 'stauros', as torture stake because we found no evidence that it was anything other than a crux simplex. If you have any evidence which points either directly or indirectly to it being the shape of a tau cross then please produce it now.

Art and tradition has pictured Jesus as being crucified on a crossbeam.

The pseudepigraphic Epistle of Barnabas, which scholars suggest may have been before the end of the 1st century, and certainly earlier than 135, whether the writer was an orthodox Christian or not, described the shape people at the time attributed to the device on which Jesus died: the comparisons it draws with Old Testament figures would have had no validity for its readers if they pictured Jesus as dying on a simple stake. Referring to what he saw as Old Testament intimations of Jesus and his cross, he likened the cross to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300), thus describing it as having a crossbeam. He also wrote, with regard to Exodus 17:11-12: "The Spirit saith to the heart of Moses, that he should make a type of the cross and of Him that was to suffer, that unless, saith He, they shall set their hope on Him, war shall be waged against them for ever. Moses therefore pileth arms one upon another in the midst of the encounter, and standing on higher ground than any he stretched out his hands, and so Israel was again victorious."

Justin Martyr (100–165) explicitly says the cross of Christ was of two-beam shape: "That lamb which was commanded to be wholly roasted was a symbol of the suffering of the cross which Christ would undergo. For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb."

Like the Epistle of Barnabas, Justin saw the stretched-out hands of Moses in the battle against Amalek as foreshadowing the cross of Jesus: "If he gave up any part of this sign, which was an imitation of the cross, the people were beaten, as is recorded in the writings of Moses; but if he remained in this form, Amalek was proportionally defeated, and he who prevailed prevailed by the cross. For it was not because Moses so prayed that the people were stronger, but because, while one who bore the name of Jesus (Joshua) was in the forefront of the battle, he himself made the sign of the cross.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Actually we translated the Greek term 'stauros', as torture stake because we found no evidence that it was anything other than a crux simplex. If you have any evidence which points either directly or indirectly to it being the shape of a tau cross then please produce it now.

Art and tradition has pictured Jesus as being crucified on a crossbeam.

The pseudepigraphic Epistle of Barnabas, which scholars suggest may have been before the end of the 1st century, and certainly earlier than 135, whether the writer was an orthodox Christian or not, described the shape people at the time attributed to the device on which Jesus died: the comparisons it draws with Old Testament figures would have had no validity for its readers if they pictured Jesus as dying on a simple stake. Referring to what he saw as Old Testament intimations of Jesus and his cross, he likened the cross to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300), thus describing it as having a crossbeam. He also wrote, with regard to Exodus 17:11-12: "The Spirit saith to the heart of Moses, that he should make a type of the cross and of Him that was to suffer, that unless, saith He, they shall set their hope on Him, war shall be waged against them for ever. Moses therefore pileth arms one upon another in the midst of the encounter, and standing on higher ground than any he stretched out his hands, and so Israel was again victorious."

Justin Martyr (100–165) explicitly says the cross of Christ was of two-beam shape: "That lamb which was commanded to be wholly roasted was a symbol of the suffering of the cross which Christ would undergo. For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb."

Like the Epistle of Barnabas, Justin saw the stretched-out hands of Moses in the battle against Amalek as foreshadowing the cross of Jesus: "If he gave up any part of this sign, which was an imitation of the cross, the people were beaten, as is recorded in the writings of Moses; but if he remained in this form, Amalek was proportionally defeated, and he who prevailed prevailed by the cross. For it was not because Moses so prayed that the people were stronger, but because, while one who bore the name of Jesus (Joshua) was in the forefront of the battle, he himself made the sign of the cross.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Art and tradition has pictured Jesus as being crucified on a crossbeam.

The pseudepigraphic Epistle of Barnabas, which scholars suggest may have been before the end of the 1st century, and certainly earlier than 135, whether the writer was an orthodox Christian or not, described the shape people at the time attributed to the device on which Jesus died: th ...[text shortened]... ame of Jesus (Joshua) was in the forefront of the battle, he himself made the sign of the cross.

You were not asked about art and tradition, what you were actually asked was, do you have any scriptural evidence which points either directly or indirectly to the term 'stauros' which is the term used in the Bible being in the shape of a Tau cross.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Art and tradition has pictured Jesus as being crucified on a crossbeam.

Art and tradition just followed what they people before them used. The people before them used a cross which they stole from the Egyptians (the Ankh).

I must also point out that you reject many other things about Christianity that exist in art and tradition. I am fairly sure for example that you do not respect the Pope as the leader of your church nor do you pray to Mary.

Originally posted by 667joe
Many Christians like to wear the cross as a show of faith. Have they considered that if Jesus were to come back, in all probability, the last thing he would want to see is another cross! (Perhaps that's why Jesus so far has not returned!)

Moreover have they considered that the cross is a pagan symbol.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You were not asked about art and tradition, what you were actually asked was, do you have any scriptural evidence which points either directly or indirectly to the term 'stauros' which is the term used in the Bible being in the shape of a Tau cross.

The term came to mean several things including crux in the shape of a Tau cross. Language has a way of adding on extra meaning as time goes on. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
The term came to mean several things including crux in the shape of a Tau cross. Language has a way of adding on extra meaning as time goes on. 😏

So you have no scriptural evidence that the term was used to denote a tau cross - thankyou. Clearly the only real reason that you think of Christ as having been put to death on a cross is because you have adopted a pagan symbol, is it not the case?

Originally posted by RJHinds
They also replaced "cross" with 'torture stake" in their New World Translation.

Pretty dim, there, Ron. What the hell do you think I'm talking about?

Originally posted by FMF
Yes I alluded to the adoption of the cross imagery in the Bible in my post. I am aware of it. But from the historical point of view ~ rather than your faith-in-what-the-authors-of-the-Bible-wrote point of view ~ the case they made that Jesus was executed by being nailed to a vertical pole and not a cross is interesting and sounds entirely plausible.

Except it's incorrect.

Doesn't that even enter the picture for you?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Why do you give it no credence given that the Bible does not actually say which was used?

What do you think "crucified" means?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
How are you going to explain this

The book The Non-Christian Cross, by John Denham Parsons, states: “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 l ...[text shortened]... e forced to conclude that your assertions are unsubstantiated and you are nothing but a windbag.

This is just another opinion of one who was perhaps paid to say this.

You miss the entire point of the scripture as you fellows have been doing for almost a hundred years now.

Yes, he was staked to the cross. Does this help you out any?

And, btw, where do you get that he was "impaled"?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crux_simplex

Missing the point, as usual.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You were not asked about art and tradition, what you were actually asked was, do you have any scriptural evidence which points either directly or indirectly to the term 'stauros' which is the term used in the Bible being in the shape of a Tau cross.

Stop it, Robbie. He gave you your "scriptural evidence".

Originally posted by twhitehead
Art and tradition just followed what they people before them used. The people before them used a cross which they stole from the Egyptians (the Ankh).

I must also point out that you reject many other things about Christianity that exist in art and tradition. I am fairly sure for example that you do not respect the Pope as the leader of your church nor do you pray to Mary.

This sounds as if you didn't read his entire post. Shocking.