Was it a cross?

A

Azure24

Well-Known Member
Messages
452
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Though us Christians usually argue that Jesus was killed on a cross, the Bible doesn't unambiguously state this. The greek words in the Bible that are translated by Christians as cross are stauros and xy'lon; the former actually means stake/pole, while the latter literally means stick/tree. Death by being tied to a stake of wood, hands above head, was employed by the Romans, and this so-called crux simplex (simple cross, though not actually cross-shaped) may have been the form of death that the Bible actually describes Jesus as having had. There have been suggestions that Jesus died having been nailed to a tree. Roman documents, on the other hand, suggest that in Judea, criminals were usually crucified on a Y-shaped device. But what do you think?
 
Azure24 said:
Though us Christians usually argue that Jesus was killed on a cross, the Bible doesn't unambiguously state this. The greek words in the Bible that are translated by Christians as cross are stauros and xy'lon; the former actually means stake/pole, while the latter literally means stick/tree. Death by being tied to a stake of wood, hands above head, was employed by the Romans, and this so-called crux simplex (simple cross, though not actually cross-shaped) may have been the form of death that the Bible actually describes Jesus as having had. There have been suggestions that Jesus died having been nailed to a tree. Roman documents, on the other hand, suggest that in Judea, criminals were usually crucified on a Y-shaped device. But what do you think?
Click to expand...

He was hung from wood. It was in such a way that He could no longer breathe, and subsequently that combined with the beating He took was too much...He died.

v/r

Q
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
It was a scaffold, but it made a lousy amulet because it looked like a pound sign. #

Chris
Click to expand...

Good possiblity Chris.

v/r

Q
 
The shape of the cross is an interesting topic - I'm under the impression that a "X" was also a possibility. In fact, in early Christianity, the Chi-Rho symbol of an "X" with a "P" over the center was the main symbol for Christianity, so far as I understand it, which literally depicted Jesus on a cross.
 
I said:
The shape of the cross is an interesting topic - I'm under the impression that a "X" was also a possibility. In fact, in early Christianity, the Chi-Rho symbol of an "X" with a "P" over the center was the main symbol for Christianity, so far as I understand it, which literally depicted Jesus on a cross.
Click to expand...
From what little I have read, this was the symbol adopted by the Jesuits, a sort of logo if you will, to denote that monastic order.
 
Azure24 said:
Though us Christians usually argue that Jesus was killed on a cross, the Bible doesn't unambiguously state this. The greek words in the Bible that are translated by Christians as cross are stauros and xy'lon; the former actually means stake/pole, while the latter literally means stick/tree. Death by being tied to a stake of wood, hands above head, was employed by the Romans, and this so-called crux simplex (simple cross, though not actually cross-shaped) may have been the form of death that the Bible actually describes Jesus as having had. There have been suggestions that Jesus died having been nailed to a tree. Roman documents, on the other hand, suggest that in Judea, criminals were usually crucified on a Y-shaped device. But what do you think?
Click to expand...
yes you are right the bible does not say cross. its good to stick to the bible then we are not led along to other things. many translators have been led along to put cross in their bibles when it should not be there in the first place.
 
I said:
The shape of the cross is an interesting topic - I'm under the impression that a "X" was also a possibility. In fact, in early Christianity, the Chi-Rho symbol of an "X" with a "P" over the center was the main symbol for Christianity, so far as I understand it, which literally depicted Jesus on a cross.
Click to expand...

Still used in the Catholic church, usually on alter cloths and clerical vestments.

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
1b15d560.jpg
[/FONT]
 
Yes, that's the one - wasn't aware that it was still in use, actually. Not seen much of it around after the Byzantines fell.
 
The Sign of the Cross, I was taught, originated as a way for Christians to identify other Christians during the time Christianity was being oppressed by Rome. That would indicate, at least to me, that even the early Christians thought Jesus was crucified on a cross. So, true or not, the story of Jesus being crucified on a cross is quite old indeed, originating possibly in the first or second centuries of the common era.
 
I have read that the Romans had ready-made posts sticking in the ground at the place of execution, and criminals carried their own crosspiece up to the place of execution. Then their arms were fastened to the crosspiece (tied, nailed, whatever) and they were hoisted up to the post. I like this version because it seems to me to reconcile the different viewpoints.
 
Scarlet Pimpernel said:
I have read that the Romans had ready-made posts sticking in the ground at the place of execution, and criminals carried their own crosspiece up to the place of execution. Then their arms were fastened to the crosspiece (tied, nailed, whatever) and they were hoisted up to the post. I like this version because it seems to me to reconcile the different viewpoints.
Click to expand...

Also, the punishment of execution by crucifixion was a practice carried out by the Romans until 312 A.D., when it was banned by Constantine. Which means there is secular historical evidence to show that the instrument of death, was indeed, a "cross" (or two lengths of timber perpendicular to each other), on which a human was "restrained" to by various means, until he or she died.

In fact there are the remains of a physical person who was crucified (nails and all), between 1 and 70 A.D. (interestingly, in Jerusalem). His ossuary reads “Yehohanan, the son of Hagakol.” Why only one body, out of thousands allegedly crucified? Obviously his family was allowed to provide for a proper burial. Normally, the convicted were left on the cross until the animals and environment multilated and destroyed the body until little remained, a part of the punishment. Not only did the Romans execute the "guilty" but humiliated and dishonored them in this way.

More can be found on this subject in the book by Vassilios Tzaferis. “Crucifixion -- The Archaeological Evidence".

v/r

Q
 
The 'P' and 'x' thingy is the Chi Rho. Depicting the first 2 (greek) letters of the word christ. It's also called the Labarum.

Sub


has a lot of particulars associated with it. Wiki it for more info.
 
Karimarie said:
The Sign of the Cross, I was taught, originated as a way for Christians to identify other Christians during the time Christianity was being oppressed by Rome. That would indicate, at least to me, that even the early Christians thought Jesus was crucified on a cross. So, true or not, the story of Jesus being crucified on a cross is quite old indeed, originating possibly in the first or second centuries of the common era.
Click to expand...

The Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics says: "With the 4th cent[ury] magical belief began to take a firmer hold within the Church." As with a magic charm, simply making the sign of the cross was thought to be "the surest defence against demons, and the remedy for all diseases." Superstitious use of the cross continues to this day.
 
ohhhhhhhhh this looks just like my old dog , he is getting on a bit now thou, it surprised me when i saw this picture on the post above,
 
mee said:

The Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics says: "With the 4th cent[ury] magical belief began to take a firmer hold within the Church." As with a magic charm, simply making the sign of the cross was thought to be "the surest defence against demons, and the remedy for all diseases." Superstitious use of the cross continues to this day.
Click to expand...

Your encyclopedia is incorrect. The sign of the cross is a form of recognition, and was used as such during perilous times for Christians. Though some may use it to ward of evil spirits, that is not its intent. In fact today, those that use the sign of the cross in self affirmation do so in different ways. For example the Roman Catholics sign one way while Orthodox Christians sign a slightly different way.

Furthermore, I think you are beginning to encroach upon other's beliefs in Christianity. That is not good.

We (most Christians) are quite aware that the sign of the cross wards off no evil any better than a pendant around the neck bearing the symbol of the cross...

v/r

Q
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top