Stake or Cross? How did Jesus die? What proof do we have?

[Srecko Sostar]

9 minutes ago, Anna said:

Wait a minute, I thought Simon of Cy·reʹne carried the torture stake

John 19:17- Bearing the torture stake for himself, he went out to the so-called Skull Place, which is called Golʹgo·tha in Hebrew.

Mark 15:21 - Also, they compelled into service a passerby, a certain Simon of Cy·reʹne, coming from the countryside, the father of Alexander and Ruʹfus, to carry his torture stake.

Luke 23:26 - Now as they led him away, they seized a certain Simon of Cy·reʹne, who was coming from the countryside, and they placed the torture stake on him to carry it behind Jesus.

No one can be trusted :)))) But here we have two witnesses against one witness. I am pretty sure what (Judicial Committee) decision would be.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

BillyTheKid46:

How about this ?

I will agree that Stavros is a Greek Name if you will agree that Sean Connery was the only REAL James Bond in movies.

In the interest of having an amicable, non-hostile environment, I will agree with your irrelevant drivel, if you will agree with my irrelevant drivel !

What could be more fair?

[Manuel Boyet Enicola]

5 hours ago, Anna said:

Wait a minute, I thought Simon of Cy·reʹne carried the torture stake

Jesus carried it initially.  Later, the Roman soldiers "compelled" Simon of Cyrene to carry it for him....

 

[Space Merchant]

43 minutes ago, Manuel Boyet Enicola said:

Jesus carried it initially.  Later, the Roman soldiers "compelled" Simon of Cyrene to carry it for him....

 

Seconded.

[JOHN BUTLER]

12 hours ago, Anna said:

While vacationing one year in Greece we got stuck in Athens for a couple of days waiting for our friends who were arriving by car from central Europe. In the meantime we decided to do some sightseeing and while doing our touristy thing we got joined by a jolly and friendly young Greek man. This was quite a long time ago, before the days of paranoia, plus my mum and I were rather laid back. Anyway, this young man, in his late teens or early twenties, decided he was going to show us around. I won’t go into detail, he did a great job, (although he smoked like a chimney), and like practically every Greek I have ever heard of was called Stavros. It was just now while reading this it suddenly dawned on me that the name Stavros must be connected to Stauros. And sure enough  HERE  it says this about the origin of the name: “Name Stavros is a rather common Greek male name and as we said comes from the Greek word “stavros” which means cross. Of course in the ancient years the word cross was referring to the item of this shape, with no political or religious meaning. The cross was used by barbarians and then by Romans who started crucifying people as a punishment for their scenes. The cross became a sacred item and symbol for Christianity when Christ was crucified on it by the Romans. The Greek Orthodox Church celebrates the name Stavros in memory of those important moments for Christianity on September 14th, the day of the Holy Cross".

I don’t know how that claim can be made “that in ancient years the word cross was referring to the item of this shape” when the etymology of that word is said to originate from  ἵστημι histēmi: meaning "straighten up", "stand" . (Besides, excuse the smuttiness, I think if I was a guy I’d rather be likened to an upright pole than some other shape).  On the other hand, an upright pole or stake doesn't necessarily have to exclude some other piece of wood attached to it, if the main part is the upright stake.  I mean when the Bible talks about stauros and if it had a cross beam, would it then have to call it "a stauros with another piece of wood horizontally attached at the top of it" ? As everyone knows, the meanings of words change through the centuries, even just decades. eg. gay meant happy not that long ago, now it means homosexual. Hypothetically it could be difficult for someone who discovered a text 2,000 years from now, to know what the author was speaking about if he wrote about a "gay couple". Were the couple happy, or were they homosexual?.....In the same token, was it a single upright stake, or a stake with a cross beam? Sorry, I think I'm just rambling....

 

 

@Anna  Anna, you've just made my day. I laughed at this comment. Thank you    And i loved the smutty bit.  

[JOHN BUTLER]

12 hours ago, Outta Here said:

If that is the extent of your understanding of God's word.......then I understand your position at last.

You are so funny. That's Anna and you have made me laugh today. 

[JOHN BUTLER]

11 hours ago, JW Insider said:

It should be noted that none of the pictures you showed, not even this one of pagan Marsyas, were from sources giving evidence that Jesus died on an upright pole. I only mention this fact because some people might see such pictures and get a sense that there is historical evidence about an upright pole as a method for the execution of Jesus. It should probably also be noted that you have found no pictures of pagan persons on crosses prior to Christ, but have found several images of pagans on poles. Yet, these ideas about pagans and idolatry still seem to be the key to your complete rejection the earliest known evidence about the shape of the stauros upon which Jesus was executed. Of course, you have the right to accept or reject whatever evidence you wish on whatever grounds you wish. I'm just looking for the logic behind it.

You have used the term crucifixion to indicate execution on a traditional cross-shaped device. If this is what you mean, then who do you think originated crucifixion on such a device before the Romans? And for how many years, decades, centuries, etc., do you think these other persons were executing people on crosses before the Romans. Also, I note that you describe it as "cruelty imposed on criminals and slaves," which is true, but which appears to be at odds with the logic in the next statement:

Crucifixion itself was cruelty imposed on criminals/slaves, but you say the original word for it was added later to symbolize an honorable and victorious death. What was that original word that was added later? How original could it have been if it was added later?

And now you say it was the first rendering of "torture stake" that wasn't available until a very long time later because it was hidden. Again, what was this first rendering and how could it have been first if it came along a very long time later after being hidden?

Because you are repeatedly using the term "we know" about all these points, I don't think you should have trouble answering any of the questions that come up about them.

And of course, you included the first definition as taken from classical Greek and "pagan" authors, but left off the second definition which aligns with the examples found in the Christian Greek Scriptures.

Here is definition 2 from STRONGS NT 4716:

2. a cross;
a. the well-known instrument of most cruel and ignominious punishment, borrowed by the Greeks and Romans from the Phoenicians; to it were affixed among the Romans, down to the time of Constantine the Great, the guiltiest criminals, particularly the basest slaves, robbers, the authors and abetters of insurrections, and occasionally in the provinces, at the arbitrary pleasure of the governors, upright and peaceable men also, and even Roman citizens themselves; cf. Winers RWB, under the word Kreuzigung; Merz in Herzog edition 1 ((cf. Schaff-Herzog) also Schultze in Herzog edition 2), under the word Kreuz; Keim, iii., p. 409ff. (English translation, vi. 138; BB. DD., see under the words, Cross, Crucifixion; O. Zöckler, Das Kreuz Christi (Gütersloh, 1875); English translation, Lond. 1878; Fulda, Das Kreuz u. d. Kreuzigung (Bresl. 1878); Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, ii. 582ff). This horrible punishment the innocent Jesus also suffered: Matthew 27:32, 40, 42; Mark 15:21, 30, 32; Luke 23:26; John 19:17, 19, 25, 31; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 12:2; θάνατος σταυροῦ, Philippians 2:8; τό αἷμα τοῦ σταυροῦ, blood shed on the cross; Colossians 1:20.
b. equivalent to the crucifixion which Christ underwent: Galatians 5:11 (on which see σκάνδαλον, under the end); Ephesians 2:16; with the addition of τοῦ Χριστοῦ, 1 Corinthians 1:17; the saving power of his crucifixion, Philippians 3:18 (on which see ἐχθρός, at the end); Galatians 6:14; τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ διώκεσθαι, to encounter persecution on account of one's avowed belief in the saving efficacy of Christ's crucifixion, Galatians 6:12; ὁ λόγος ὁ τοῦ σταυροῦ, the doctrine concerning the saving power of the death on the cross endured by Christ, 1 Corinthians 1:18. The judicial usage which compelled those condemned to crucifixion themselves to carry the cross to the place of punishment (Plutarch, de sara numinis vindict. c. 9; Artemidorus Daldianus, oneir. 2, 56, cf. John 19:17), gave rise to the proverbial expression αἴρειν or λαμβάνειν or βαστάζειν τόν σταυρόν αὐτοῦ, which was usually used by those who, on behalf of God's cause, do not hesitate cheerfully and manfully to bear persecutions, troubles, distresses — thus recalling the fate of Christ and the spirit in which he encountered it (cf. Bleek, Synop. Erkl. der drei ersten Evangg. i, p. 439f): Matthew 10:38; Matthew 16:24; Mark 8:34; Mark 10:21 (R L in brackets); Mark 15:21; Luke 9:23; Luke 14:27.

I think that put the Kid in his place.  

Just shows how well the JW Org had trained him, to use one meaning but deliberately leave out the second meaning. Oh dear. 

Thank you for this well thought out comment. 

 

[Evacuated]

50 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

You are so funny. That's Anna and you have made me laugh today. 

Well that is a good spirit to display. And bang on target. I certainly do understand your position now.

[JW Insider]

11 hours ago, Manuel Boyet Enicola said:

Jesus carried the stauros or stake.

What you generally describe does seem to work with the gospel accounts. There are some specific points I would still question, including the fact that Anna already pointed out: Jesus was not nailed until reaching the final place of execution.

Some have shown concern about whether Jesus could really have carried his stauros considering the weight. There is some evidence that the Roman execution process could include putting a notch in the patibulum beam of the stauros that was carried in public on the way to the execution site. 

Some have also shown concern about the extra time it would take to prepare a patibulum with a notch while in the midst of a "rush" to judgment. But if a stake/tree was already standing at the place of execution "Skull Place" it could have already contained the notch that the patibulum was merely hoisted onto.

The idea of the arms stretched wide across a patibulum to carry it, and then later having the hands nailed widely apart onto that same patibulum also solves an issue about whether a ladder was needed. If Jesus were already nailed to a patibulum then 2 or 3 soldiers who were 6-feet tall could easily hoist it to a notch (already prepared) about 8 feet off the ground. If the arms remain at about the same level as the head, then Jesus' feet are still a foot or two off the ground depending on his height. And they would need to be nailed, too.

Previously, some have speculated that the very fact that this Skull Place existed and two criminals were being executed there on the same day could be an indication that the scarce timber of this country was already standing in place ready for constant re-use without the need to dig new holes and hoist tall poles into them and shore them up so that they could not fall over. The patibulum practice of making someone march through the public carrying it on their back, makes perfect sense in such an environment. 

But it's still speculation. To me it's a matter of which way the overall evidence leans.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

18 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

suggest you research the point of the matter before you sarcastically call victory. None of which was rightfully understood by a junior researcher and a person that is no longer in good standing to the organization I presume he was baptized in by his own admission. I would say he is playing for the other team and only uses he personal logic to distract and confuse. Personally, I agree with the Watchtower findings, however, I do my own research through scholastic measures which I find no evidence of it here.

After carefully considering the matter I would have to adopt the philosophy of winter combat in North Korea during the 1950's.

" ... is this the hill you want to die on?"

I have completely solved this quandary by not caring either way ...... BECAUSE ... of all the infinite things in the Universe one could care about ... or SHOULD care about ... this does not even make it to the list.

This is, figuratively speaking, not a hill worth  the effort.

Not really.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

4 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Is this Porkchop Hill? I believe the Americans kept it with persistence and much senseless bloodshed that millennials don't remember.

I know about Porkchop Hill .... but I was speaking only about general principles.

[Anna]

On 11/17/2018 at 9:40 PM, Manuel Boyet Enicola said:

 

1.  Jesus carried the stauros or stake. 

2.  Both of his HANDS were nailed to it while grasping it, a meter or a yard apart.  That is, nails were driven from the back, not from the palms. 

 

16 hours ago, Manuel Boyet Enicola said:

Jesus carried it initially.  Later, the Roman soldiers "compelled" Simon of Cyrene to carry it for him....

Yes, I realised that, I must have misunderstood you. I though you meant that Jesus was nailed to the patibulum while he was carrying it, so I wondered how Simon could have got a hold of it... You must have meant that they nailed Jesus to it once they got to the site.