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

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Letter of Barnabas.

A doctrinally unsound, anti-Judaism, pseudoscripture, formed well after the commencing of a time of successful, apostate, invasive, contamination of true Christian teaching  is no basis for contradicting a simple understanding of the scripturally termed implement of Jesus's execution.

This late second/early third century, magical amulet depicting the "crucfixion"(pictured above) seems to have a connection with spiritistic darkness. Notwithstanding a possible chronological disconnect between the picture on one side and the lettering on the other,  Roy D.Kotansk, (THE MAGIC ‘CRUCIFIXION’ GEM IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM), has stated that: "Its invocation must have served as a kind of secret (or magic) formula, known only to the Christian ‘initiate’ who, in so using it, is seen to be calling upon the power of the cross for its redemptive force."

Speaking of such "invocations" the gem's contemporary 2nd/3rd Century theologian, Origen, noted: "Such power, indeed, does the name of Jesus possess over evil spirits, that there have been instances where it was effectual, when it was pronounced even by bad men" (Against Celsus, I.6).

These spiritistic connections with such "evidences" disqualify (for me) a serious consideration of them as a challenge to the view that the stake of Jesus execution was anything other than an upright stave. To me this is akin to the calling of Al Capone as a character witness for Enoch L.Johnson.

In fact, the greater the antiquity of such evidences, the firmer the confirmation of Pauls words at 2Thess.2:7:

" True, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work.."

😊

[Anna]

On 11/14/2018 at 3:45 AM, Srecko Sostar said:

Hi. You do not need to declare in all details how you got information's. Just say; some people around me in some situations while talking about Bible, give me some evidence and reasoning about issue, so this was disturbed me and intrigued me in measure that i have to hear from you what you thinking about it. Do you have some new historical and scientific research? Do brothers making any new research on subjects? :))))

Thank you Srecko for your concern. This is a very tactful and correct way to ask for a reason for something. 

I will probably be very concise and to the point. But why I really mentioned this was because you implied that not believing the claim made by the GB, that Jesus did not die on a cross, would get me in some kind of trouble, and I was saying no, it would not.

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, Outta Here said:

A doctrinally unsound, anti-Judaism, pseudoscripture, formed well after the commencing of a time of successful, apostate, invasive, contamination of true Christian teaching  is no basis for contradicting a simple understanding of the scripturally termed implement of Jesus's execution.

True enough about the Letter of Barnabas. I pretty much agree with the assessment. But we don't find the Letter of Barnabas trying to convince anyone about the shape of the stauros. He does not produce a teaching about the stauros. So it really shows that someone associated with Christian teaching, in just a few decades following Christ's death, merely assumed that the shape of Jesus' stauros was already common knowledge. He didn't think it was necessary to discuss or overcome any teachings about an upright stake vs a T-shaped stauros.

So in this sense we aren't concerning ourselves with his teachings. And, besides that, we surely we don't dismiss all his teachings and interpretations either just because they weren't specifically described in the Bible. For example, "Barnabas" teaches that the "Goat of Azazel" pictures Jesus Christ. This is not specified in the Bible, and one might even think that the goat selected for the Atonement Day sacrifice is the one representing Christ, and the scapegoat represents something else. But we accept this teaching that "Barnabas" accepted not because he taught it, but because we assume it was common knowledge that fits the general view of those who associated themselves with the teachings of Christianity. Of course, at one time the Watchtower taught that the goat of Azazel represented those turned over to Satan the Devil for destruction with "no atonement." But we have gone back to full agreement with the Letter of Barnabas.

[Anna]

There is something else and very interesting  I have found regarding the shape of the "cross/stauros" but I will have to wait until our power is back (Ice storm) and I can get on the computer because typing this on the phone is a pain.

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, Outta Here said:

Notwithstanding a possible chronological disconnect between the picture on one side and the lettering on the other

Turns out this was very common. I read in both Frank Shaw's and Larry Hurtado's and in reviews of other scholars' books that re-use and re-purposing of gemstones/jewelry for such purposes had a long history. Kind of like putting a copper penny into one of those machines that smashes it, stamps a message on it, and makes it ready for a charm bracelet.

1 hour ago, Outta Here said:

Origen, noted: "Such power, indeed, does the name of Jesus possess over evil spirits, that there have been instances where it was effectual, when it was pronounced even by bad men" (Against Celsus, I.6). 

Similar idea in Acts from the seven sons of Sceva.

• (Acts 19:13-15) But some of the Jews who traveled around casting out demons also tried to use the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had wicked spirits; they would say: “I solemnly charge you by Jesus whom Paul preaches.” 14 Now there were seven sons of a Jewish chief priest named Sceʹva doing this. 15 But in answer the wicked spirit said to them: “I know Jesus and I am acquainted with Paul; but who are you?”

And again, we don't automatically assume that they, for example, must have mispronounced Jesus' name or Paul's name just because they might have been doctrinally unsound, pseudohealers, who were contaminating the true message of Christianity. In fact, we might imagine that they were trying very hard to get their facts just right so that their magic would be effective. The use of a cross on a spiritistic gemstone can just be another piece of evidence of what some thought was common knowledge.

The comments on Hurtado's blog from outsiders make a similar point with reference to the Alexamenos Grafitti displayed earlier:

---------------remainder of post is excerpt taken from comments here: https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2011/10/13/the-staurogram-correcting-errors/

David Coulter permalink

Actually, one of the very earliest pictures of Jesus we have is a satirical piece of graffiti depicting a man worshipping the crucified Christ (though Christ is portrayed with a donkey’s head): http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Jesus_graffito.jpg

It’s thought to date from somewhere between the first to third century, and includes the caption “Alexamenos worships God.”

 

• 
  larryhurtado permalink

  Yes, although it isn’t a representation by a Christian, but by a pagan mocker. But I think it certainly suggests that Christians referred to Jesus’ crucifixion “on the street”, and that (contra some assertions) it was a part of popular-level Christian discourse and devotional practice, such that the anonymous pagan who drew this graffito knew of the centrality of Jesus’ crucifixion for Christians.

   
  • 
    David Coulter permalink

    I agree. The “artist” obviously sees the crucifixion as the iconic, immediately recognizable image of Christianity.

[Evacuated]

49 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

full agreement with the Letter of Barnabas.

Depends how you look at it. I see the anonymous writer as a "minister of light", knowingly or unknowingly (2Cor.11:15) and any doctorinal insight harmonising with truth as no more than a similarity with the spirit behind the words of the demonized girl at Acts 16:17. And whether conciously or not, given the spirit behind apostates, the inroads are far too subtle for humans to discern strategically.

Same goes for the other examples. The distortion of Jesus manner of execution may go back earlier than any of these artifacts. We are dealing with a superhuman enemy here. One thing for sure is that none of these experts are publishing the way of salvation and neither does the adoption of their views lead in that direction.

IMHO of course.  😊 

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

no basis for contradicting a simple understanding of the scripturally termed implement of Jesus's execution.

I know what you mean, but to clarify, the Scriptures never term the implement of Jesus' execution as an upright stake. Interesting that this "Letter of Barnabas" not only mentions the T-shaped stauros, but he also mentions about Jesus: "for it was necessary that He should suffer on the tree." The WTS publications have sometimes implied that these terms stauros and xylon [wood/tree] must be restricted to their simple meanings. Of course, the WTS publications never insist on this simplicity when it doesn't fit an existing understanding. Something like that was already seen with the word "hand." But it even happens with the word xylon itself, which in classical Greek can refer to: logs, timbers, trees, benches, wood market, a length measurement, something disgraceful/shameful, a pillory, punishment stocks, wooden club, etc. (Leolaia, p.8). This idea, although claimed in WTS publications, is contradicted in our own KIT:

 

[Evacuated]

54 minutes ago, Anna said:

something else and very interesting

Cue the Jaws theme yet again! Can't wait.  😁

[JW Insider]

4 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

And whether consciously or not, given the spirit behind apostates, the inroads are far too subtle for humans to discern strategically.

That might be true, but then we'd have to be concerned if this was not also true of Rutherford who promoted the idea that Azazel referred to Satan instead of Jesus. Or even the idea promoted more recently that the stauros associated with the execution of Jesus was not a two-beamed stauros, but a ("cheap shot" alert) simple, phallic-shaped pole.

[Anna]

4 hours ago, Anna said:

Thank you Srecko for your concern. This is a very tactful and correct way to ask for a reason for something. 

I will probably be very concise and to the point. But why I really mentioned this was because you implied that not believing the claim made by the GB, that Jesus did not die on a cross, would get me in some kind of trouble, and I was saying no, it would not. 

You are confused @Srecko Sostar. Sorry. What I mean to say is that I do not have to beat about the bush or tread carefully because of fear of disfellowshipping just because I think we should not categorically claim that Jesus did not die on a cross. You seemed to imply earlier that one could get disfellowshipped for that and be branded an apostate.

[Evacuated]

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Similar idea in Acts from the seven sons of Sceva.

Similar to Origen's observation? Hardly! "Effectual" means : successful in producing a desired or intended result;  their experience was that "the man in whom the wicked spirit was leaped upon them, got the mastery of one after the other, and prevailed against them, so that they fled naked and wounded out of that house." Acts 19:16. That is not what they wanted surely? But it does indicate that any seeming influence thay had over demonic spirits was just an illusion. They were being manipulated to suit demonic ends. As for any sincerity in their actions, no chance. They just wanted to enhance their spiritistic and very likely lucrative scam.

I could certainly conceive of individuals later seizing on any novelty idea to enhance a good luck charm, and certainly by the time this amulet was produced, the apostate legends clustering around the Jesus account would be like maggots in rotten meat.

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

• • I agree. The “artist” obviously sees the crucifixion as the iconic, immediately recognizable image of Christianity.

Almost, but not quite.Given the loose dating of 1st to 3rd Century, I would say that The “artist” possibly sees the crucifixion as the iconic, immediately recognizable image of apostate Christianity.

😊

[Evacuated]

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

we'd have to be concerned if this was not also true of Rutherford who promoted the idea that Azazel referred to Satan instead of Jesus.

Getting something wrong is not the same as being an apostate. You actually know this, so I am surprised that you would use an argument of this nature. I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself here so will say nothing more on the topic for now. (regrettably, as I was dealing with the comment on the "stocks").