Consider: Christ did not die on a cross

[triedit]

First off, no disrespect intended. This is prompted by a visit from my Jehovah's Witnesses friends and some literature they left.

I was raised Christian and the cross was a big part of our worship. I know it is crucial to Catholicism and all things Mason. Some Catholic and Masonic rites have to do with "the stations of the cross" which interestingly have a sound basis in paganism and worship of the "corners of the earth" ie North, South, East and West

I am impressed with the tract that was left for me though. It says that the original greek of the books of today's bible use the word xylon (which means tree) and the word stauros (upright stake or pole) in discussion of the murder of Christ. According to this literature, there is no entry in the original greek text that even remotely refers to a cross.

This is further supported by ancient drawings of Roman executions. They use a single wooden pole. It was not until 300 years after the death of Jesus that Christians began using the idea of the cross.

I found this tremendously interesting. In all my years of study this has not come up before.

A secondary point, one which Im not sure I agree with, suggests that it is deranged to wear, display, and sort of worship a tool of murder. While on the one hand that seems logical, I can see where in the case of Christ the tool of murder would be symbolic of the sacrifice and it is the sacrifice that is to be celebrated not the actual act of murder.

I know there are lots of Christians on this forum. What do you make of the idea the Christ was executed on a pole rather than a cross?

[El Barto]

Interesting.
But theres some evidence that he may never have died on the cross.
Apperently he was not on the cross for three days.
If he was up on the cross on a friday, it was asked to bring him down before the sabbath, which is sundown from friday to saturday.
Death took something like two weeks.

[CDNBear]

First off, no disrespect intended. This is prompted by a visit from my Jehovah's Witnesses friends and some literature they left.

I was raised Christian and the cross was a big part of our worship. I know it is crucial to Catholicism and all things Mason. Some Catholic and Masonic rites have to do with "the stations of the cross" which interestingly have a sound basis in paganism and worship of the "corners of the earth" ie North, South, East and West

I am impressed with the tract that was left for me though. It says that the original greek of the books of today's bible use the word xylon (which means tree) and the word stauros (upright stake or pole) in discussion of the murder of Christ. According to this literature, there is no entry in the original greek text that even remotely refers to a cross.

This is further supported by ancient drawings of Roman executions. They use a single wooden pole. It was not until 300 years after the death of Jesus that Christians began using the idea of the cross.

I found this tremendously interesting. In all my years of study this has not come up before.

A secondary point, one which Im not sure I agree with, suggests that it is deranged to wear, display, and sort of worship a tool of murder. While on the one hand that seems logical, I can see where in the case of Christ the tool of murder would be symbolic of the sacrifice and it is the sacrifice that is to be celebrated not the actual act of murder.

I know there are lots of Christians on this forum. What do you make of the idea the Christ was executed on a pole rather than a cross?

I thought it was an 'X'...I came across something to that effect in debate sometime ago. I could be mistaken.

Can I ask a question though..?

What's with the word 'murder'?

As far as I know, he sacrificed himself. Knowing full well what was coming, he selflessly gave himself. He was executed, true, but don't you think the word 'murder', perpetuates a stereotypical myth?

lol...no drama intended, just asking, not accusing!!!

[karrie]

I personally find it irrelevant whether it was a pole or a cross, so long as the intent behind wearing the symbol is understood.

Even within the Christian sects you will see different traditions. Baptists have chastised me for the macabre way we Catholics keep Christ on the cross, wearing crucifixes, hanging crucifixes in the church, rather than 'acknowledging his resurrection', by wearing or hanging a bare and empty cross. They seem to miss the fact that there are varied ways people worship, varied aspects to ponder.

Anyway, it's just a symbol of the act of sacrifice, the resurrection, the faith. I don't think anyone typically slaps on their necklace and thinks 'Wow, I'm wearing a depiction of a torture device.' So whether it's the 'right' depiction of how he died or not is irrelevant to me.

[Mark]

Well, I think there is enough historcal fact to back up that Christ not only was crucified, but that he also existed. People can debate around the clock whether he was the son of God or not, but his life and death intersects through Judaism, Islam and Christianity. All of these religions basically agree that Christ was crucified.

There are so many differenct interpretations of Christianity.

Personally, I think that the vast amount of different literature around Christ's death lends itself to the summation that he died on the cross.

Now ask me if I think he was white with flowing blond hair:smile:

[CDNBear]

Now ask me if I think he was white with flowing blond hair:smile:

Please do elaborate...:blum:

[El Barto]

Well, I think there is enough historcal fact to back up that Christ not only was crucified, but that he also existed. People can debate around the clock whether he was the son of God or not, but his life and death intersects through Judaism, Islam and Christianity. All of these religions basically agree that Christ was crucified.

There are so many differenct interpretations of Christianity.

Personally, I think that the vast amount of different literature around Christ's death lends itself to the summation that he died on the cross.

Now ask me if I think he was white with flowing blond hair:smile:

Of all the evidence of the contrary that I have read there was one thing they never touched tho. It was his teachings. To me just that alone should stand for the man.

[triedit]

Bear--do you not view execution as murder? He sure didn't nail himself to *insert tool here*. He also didn't, theoretically, sacrifice himself. He did what his father told him to do. His FATHER aka God made the sacrifice. But personally I don't think it matters whether it was on an X, a T, or a I. The important part to Christians should be that God gave his son so that human sins would be forgiven.

Karrie--you should see the anti-Catholic stuff he left for me to read. The JW disdain for Catholics is quite overwhelming. I find it uncharitable and disrespectful and makes me wonder why this is the case.

It seems that folks are always looking for "proof" of Jesus and they're just not going to get it. In my opinion, they shouldnt be looking. Christianity is all about faith. I think they should have some and trust thier God a little more. I also don't think Christians (or anyone of any faith) should waste thier time justifying/defending thier religion to someone else. It's plenty good enough to just say "It's what I believe" and end it at that.

[triedit]

Before we get misdirected, the idea for this thread is not whether Christ existed or whether he died "for our sins". It is simply pondering on whether there is enough evidence to support the idea that he was crucified on a pole rather than a cross.

[CDNBear]

Bear--do you not view execution as murder?

No I don't.

He sure didn't nail himself to *insert tool here*. He also didn't, theoretically, sacrifice himself. He did what his father told him to do. His FATHER aka God made the sacrifice. But personally I don't think it matters whether it was on an X, a T, or a I. The important part to Christians should be that God gave his son so that human sins would be forgiven.

Hence, his Dad ordained it, there for it was his will. His intent being the sacrifice of his son. Murder need not be implied.

Before we get misdirected, the idea for this thread is not whether Christ existed or whether he died "for our sins". It is simply pondering on whether there is enough evidence to support the idea that he was crucified on a pole rather than a cross.

I hear ya and I'll leave you all to it, just thought I'ld ask.