Jump to content
The World News Media

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


Guest Kurt

Recommended Posts


  • Views 17.1k
  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I've used this argument at the door and with Bible studies, too: that supposedly Christians, even if they claim they are not worshiping the item, should still find it wrong to carry around a model of

Interesting stuff, especially the difference between Chi Rho and Tau Rho. Howeve,r he states: "2)............the earliest uses of the tau-rho are not as such free-standing symbols, but form

The PDF linked earlier, "Jehovah's Witnesses and the Cross" Leolaia, 1990, speaks of semantic restriction by which some Watchtower doctrines have developed by focusing on only the simplest etymologica

Posted Images

  • Member

I found this for you @JOHN BUTLER

Watchtower 1987/ 8/15, page: 29

"We do know that his hands or arms were not simply bound, for Thomas later said: “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails.” (John 20:25) That could have meant a nail through each hand, or the plural “nails” might have reference to nail prints in ‘his hands and his feet.’ (See Luke 24:39.) We cannot know precisely where the nails pierced him, though it obviously was in the area of his hands. The Scriptural account simply does not provide exact details, nor does it need to. And if scholars who have directly examined the bones found near Jerusalem in 1968 cannot even be sure how that corpse was positioned, it certainly does not prove how Jesus was positioned.
We thus recognize that depictions of Jesus’ death in our publications, such as you see on page 24, are merely reasonable artistic renderings of the scene, not statements of anatomic absolutes. Such depictions need not reflect the changing and conflicting opinions of scholars, and the drawings definitely avoid religious symbols that stem from ancient paganism.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, Anna said:

I found this for you @JOHN BUTLER

Watchtower 1987/ 8/15, page: 29

"We do know that his hands or arms were not simply bound, for Thomas later said: “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails.” (John 20:25) That could have meant a nail through each hand, or the plural “nails” might have reference to nail prints in ‘his hands and his feet.’ (See Luke 24:39.) We cannot know precisely where the nails pierced him, though it obviously was in the area of his hands. The Scriptural account simply does not provide exact details, nor does it need to. And if scholars who have directly examined the bones found near Jerusalem in 1968 cannot even be sure how that corpse was positioned, it certainly does not prove how Jesus was positioned.
We thus recognize that depictions of Jesus’ death in our publications, such as you see on page 24, are merely reasonable artistic renderings of the scene, not statements of anatomic absolutes. Such depictions need not reflect the changing and conflicting opinions of scholars, and the drawings definitely avoid religious symbols that stem from ancient paganism.

 

@Anna Thank you for this information.

The scripture at John 20 v 25 only mentions Thomas speaking about hands and nails. No mention of feet.

The scripture mentioning feet in Luke 24 v 39 is Jesus' words not Thomas'. 

But i like that it says "That could have meant a nail through each hand, " 

I do not know what 'page 24' refers to however, as the picture i used is on page 52 of the 'Bible Teach book'.

And I like the phrase "are merely reasonable artistic renderings of the scene" .. What i mentioned before as artistic licence. 

It would be nice if you could tell me exactly what 'page 24' refers to please.

Thank you again, John

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
9 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

upright stake.jpg

This picture is taken from Hermann Fulda's book, Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung (The Cross and the Crucifixion). There is a site in Polish that covers this book in much more detail. Some of the pictures from this book are grotesque. The Polish site mentions the following about the picture that @BillyTheKid46 provided

  • Należy też nadmienić, że Fulda nie wierzy, iż Jezusowi przybito gwoździem do krzyża stopy i uważa, że jego szybką śmierć spowodowało odsunięcie siedzenia:

Which translates (approximately):

  • It is also worth noting that Fulda does not believe that Jesus' foot was nailed the nailed to the cross and considers that his rapid death resulted in the offset of the seat.

Technically, looking at John 20, it is only the hands that are spoken of as having "nails" (and Fulda offers a picture to show how both hands could have two separate nails on an upright stake). Note that the WT publications admit the same possibility, only saying it was "likely" that his feet were nailed:

*** nwtsty Luke Study Notes—Chapter 24 ***

  • 24:39 -- my hands and my feet: As in Jesus’ case, nailing the hands (and likely the feet also) of the accused to a stake was customary among the Romans. (Ps 22:16; Joh 20:25, 27; Col 2:14) Some scholars believe that a nail or nails pierced Jesus’ feet, fixing them directly to the stake or to a small platform attached to the stake.
  • 24:40 -- . . . and his feet: Some manuscripts do not include the words of this verse, but the verse has strong support in early authoritative manuscripts.

There is no Bible verse that mentions any nail or nails in Jesus' feet. But we speculate because Luke 24:39 mentions feet although doesn't mention holes or nails there.

Here is the site in Polish that covers some of the historical evolution of the Watchtower's cross/stake doctrine:

http://piotrandryszczak.pl/pal_cz1.html

A translation to English of some of the words but not the book images can be produced with this link: http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&refd=www.bing.com&rr=DC&a=http%3a%2f%2fpiotrandryszczak.pl%2fpal_cz1.html

The entire original book in German may be found here:

https://archive.org/details/daskreuzunddiek01fuldgoog/page/n11

but the pictures which begin around p.349 (p.367 of the PDF) have been obscured in that version.

Here are some of them:

Die Kreuzigung Die Kreuzigung
Die Kreuzigung Die Kreuzigung
Die Kreuzigung
Die Kreuzigung

A portion related especially to the "rush to judgment" (already discussed in some previous posts) is interesting in Fulda's book, as translated German to Polish to English here:

  • "That the PATIBULUM on his death was not used, the story itself the Gospel clearly and enough for a simple beam militate in favour of a single frame of the last moments of life, which cannot be overlooked. First I have to once again remind you of great haste with which this terrible execution has been made (paragraph 29). Even if artificially joined crosses here and there, and so in this case, he was allowed to deal on the difficult work, set in motion the first saw, hatchet, chisel and drill, because Pilate was not prepared for the crucifixion, however, Jesus immediately after the announcement of the sentence of death, without any delay, the led has been on the place of execution. In addition, a simple cross was in the Eastern countries for centuries widely adopted, for especially prepared instrument of death would have to be a separate determination, and STAUROS (pal, cross) and ETS (tree) does not fit the punishment ( See also paragraph 14). It is also impossible to the Prosecutor for this one case stubbornly insisted on a unique shape that would become his own invention.Instead, in this hour intensively think to invent a form of the cross, or the lead of pain, or increased infamy, as was the ordinary form of the cross, which was used for a long time. Zestermann (see Appendix C and D 52) confirms completely correctly (page 10), in contrast to the opinion of many others, that the Jews of crossing was not a common practice.However, this does not preclude the occasional withdrawal from their criminal code, although we can see that the High Council ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Brands, najwiarygodniejszy of the Evangelists, he writes in 15:15: "he released them to Jesus to be flogged and crucified", and Luke 23:25-26: "handed over Jesus their will;". Similarly, J 19:16. If now not all take literally, as it is written, it is obvious that, according to the Gospels crucifixion of Jesus was more a matter of the Sanhedrin than attorney. As a small erected protest due to breach of this time his right, when time was short (paragraph 29), they showed also by failure according to the law of the seven-day deadline to comply with the judgment. And so the final application Zestermanna is too premature, because Jesus was crucified by the Romans, so Cross and how to cross could be just the usual way crosses on the Romans. The writers are holding too much by them known shape, assign also to Pilate too much sticking to the right on the way to Rome, in this case, which he entrusted to the Jews, to their satisfaction. However, the soldiers, the unskilled workers of the Jews, as usual, they fixed it as soon as possible."

Note that in Fulda's upright stauros, the 'King of the Jews" sign is placed above Jesus' hands, and not more specifically above his head as the Bible describes it.

The initial quotes from Fulda appeared with an odd reason for accepting them. In fact it is the only time that the Watchtower magazine itself has mentioned him (1957) as far as I have found so far.

*** w57 3/15 p. 166 Did Christ Die on a Cross? ***

  • Certainly in view of the foregoing it cannot honestly be stated that Christ without doubt was nailed on the traditionally shaped cross. And it is of striking interest to note that it is those authorities that lean toward the view that Christ was nailed on such a cross that admit doubt. But those who hold that Christ died on a simple stake or pole are not in doubt. Says one such: “Jesus died on a simple deathstake: In support of this there speak (a) the then customary usage of this means of execution in the Orient, (b) indirectly the history itself of Jesus’ sufferings and (c) many expressions of the early Church fathers.”—The Cross and Crucifixion, Hermann Fulda.

From another perspective, that's the same as saying that scholars who are honest will rarely state that something is a definitely known fact, but will report the evidence rather than stating that something is "PROOF." And they quote the claim of Fulda written in such language here. (Actually in other portions of his book, he states that we are only left with two options, an upright stake, or a standard, traditional "crucifix.") Notice the emphasis on PROOF that the Reference Bible gave:

*** Rbi8 p. 1578 5C “Torture Stake” ***

  • The book Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung (The Cross and the Crucifixion), by Hermann Fulda, Breslau, 1878, p. 109, says: “Trees were not everywhere available at the places chosen for public execution. So a simple beam was sunk into the ground. On this the outlaws, with hands raised upward and often also with their feet, were bound or nailed.” After submitting much proof, Fulda concludes on pp. 219, 220: “Jesus died on a simple death-stake: In support of this there speak (a) the then customary usage of this means of execution in the Orient, (b) indirectly the history itself of Jesus’ sufferings and (c) many expressions of the early church fathers.”

The Awake! said:

*** g74 9/22 p. 28 Did Jesus Die on a Cross? ***

  • Fulda also points out that some of the oldest illustrations of Jesus impaled depict him on a simple pole.

But this does not appear to be true.

Even the illustration of Justus Lipsius, often used in our publications, comes from the late 1500's and early 1600's. Just as with Fulda, this is during the time of what the Watchtower calls a period of "apostasy." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

@Anna Thank you for this information.

It would be nice if you could tell me exactly what 'page 24' refers to 

   

You are welcome!

Page 24 is of that same WT and since I do not have an actual copy of it, I cannot see the illustration. WT library (where I got the quote from) does not have illustrations in it. My mum used to have all the bound volumes, I don't know if she still does, but that would be the place to look. Otherwise you have to get a hold of a pdf file of the magazine. I am assuming page 24 will have Jesus on an upright stake, with either his hands or his wrists nailed to it. Someone else might have a copy. Or if I find a reference I will let you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 minutes ago, Anna said:

You are welcome!

Page 24 is of that same WT and since I do not have an actual copy of it, I cannot see the illustration. WT library (where I got the quote from) does not have illustrations in it. My mum used to have all the bound volumes, I don't know if she still does, but that would be the place to look. Otherwise you have to get a hold of a pdf file of the magazine. I am assuming page 24 will have Jesus on an upright stake, with either his hands or his wrists nailed to it. Someone else might have a copy. Or if I find a reference I will let you know.

Thank you again for all your help, on this matter and on the other matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, Anna said:

So, is no one going to challenge Lucian of Samosata?

Prometheus, relief from the Temple of Aphrodite at Aphrodisias

Interesting to look at the term used by Lucian, "anastauroo."

*** Rbi8 p. 1577 5C “Torture Stake” ***

  • It was to such a stake, or pale, that the person to be punished was fastened, just as the popular Greek hero Prometheus was represented as tied to rocks. Whereas the Greek word that the dramatist Aeschylus used to describe this simply means to tie or to fasten, the Greek author Lucian (Prometheus, I) used a·na·stau·roʹo as a synonym for that word. In the Christian Greek Scriptures a·na·stau·roʹo occurs but once, in Heb 6:6.

I'm not saying that @BillyTheKid46 was right (I don't think he is on this point) but note what he or one of his sources apparently claimed about that word "ana-stauroo":

On 11/17/2018 at 12:45 AM, BillyTheKid46 said:

We know there was no original definition for the Latin word CRUX in Greek, just like there is no crossing wording for crucifixion in Aramaic and Hebrew. Greeks came up with ana-stauro.

If @BillyTheKid46 is right about this, it was not the original way in which anastauro was used, but I can see how it might have developed into quick way to distinguish a "crossing" cross with a simple, upright stake or pole. But this would never be claimed by the Watchtower because that would cause 'fits' with Hebrews 6:6 which uses the word and would therefore mean the following: 

  • (Hebrews 6:6) but who have fallen away, to revive them again to repentance, because they [ANASTAUROO - crucify on a dual-beamed, crossing cross] the Son of God afresh for themselves and expose him to public shame.

Wikipedia mentions that Seneca The Younger (4BC - AD65) had observed the following during his life:

  • The Greek and Latin words corresponding to "crucifixion" applied to many different forms of painful execution, including being impaled on a stake, or affixed to a tree, upright pole (a crux simplex), or (most famous now) to a combination of an upright (in Latin, stipes) and a crossbeam (in Latin, patibulum). Seneca the Younger wrote: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet".[14]

Just another thought. Some large bones all come together in a smaller area at the wrist and there is therefore very little space at the wrist to pound a nail without the probability of breaking bones.

Related image

There was a posting on this topic, which seemed all wrong for this same reason:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

but haters of the Watchtower to use such tactics out of spite and resentment.

Sure. But those kind of tactics would be self defeating for someone looking for the truth. I would think most on here are just looking for facts to establish the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Interesting to look at the term used by Lucian, "anastauroo."

Lucian also used that term (not sure if it was exactly that term because I cannot check my sources right now) in his writings about the Christians and their "crucified sophist" referring to Jesus in "the death of Peregrine":

The poor wretches have convinced themselves, first and foremost, that they are going to be immortal and live for all time, in consequence of which they despise death and even willingly give themselves into custody; most of them. Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they are all brothers of one another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist himself and living under his laws. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Just another thought. Some large bones all come together in a smaller area at the wrist and there is therefore very little space at the wrist to pound a nail without the probability of breaking bones.

Yes. Also, I meant to reply to your other post where you mentioned someone experimenting with various forms of attachment and that it was found that a nail through the palm of the hand would not necessarily rip through. My point in defending the WT depicting the nail going through the wrists was made on the assumption that the WT used earlier experiments which stated that the palm of the hand was not strong enough. I suppose the WT has a point when it says that one could keep changing the illustrations depending on new ideas, so they will just stick to the one since it's only meant to be an approximate depiction anyway....

I am thinking, looking at it from a biological point of view, that the nail could find the point of least resistance and could slip between the carpal bones in the wrist without breaking them....

Someone must have experimentally tried that as well I'm sure...

Ps. Here is someone's idea of where the nail could have gone through. But this idea has been disputed by some.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/space_of_Destot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

as depicted by the photo, the person with a crossbeam was usually tied or nailed already to be easily hoisted to a T. This isn’t written in scripture or hinted.

The use of the patibulum as a key part of the stauros, included parading the accused through the public as he was marched toward execution and sometimes flogged along the way. This idea is definitely hinted at in the scriptural accounts.

The imprint of multiple nails in the hands may also be a hint that the final form was more like a T, and the idea that the sign was over his head, not his hands, is also a hint that the final form was more like a T.

Also, as already pointed out, the scriptures say both things, that Jesus was "nailed" to the execution device, and that he was "hung" from the execution device. The type of patibulum attachment you describe would be a good solution to match both terms to a T.

5 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

15th century and 19th-century writings come from the same research done in the 4th century and earlier.

By the term "15th century," I assume you mean the late 1500's (16th century) and early 1600's (17th century) when Lipsius was published. And yes it's true he used research from the 4th century and earlier. But he, Lipsius, also came to the conclusion after all that researech, that Jesus was crucified on a dual-beamed cross. Quoting from the same book you quoted, Crucifixion in Antiquity, by Gunnar Samuelsson:

  • "It was on a crux immissa, Lipsius concludes, that Jesus had to suffer and die." [LIPSIUS, De Cruce, p.27-29]

Imagine! After all this research and discussion, and the fact that the Watchtower publications repeat his illustration of a crux simplex, our publications regularly leave out the fact that Lipsius concluded that it was a cross with a lowered crossbeam (patibulum).

Fulda, the 19th century researcher we have spoken about, is also criticized in the "Crucifixion in Antiquity" book, as a person who doesn't explain his own contradictions, and draws some of his conclusions without providing any of those quotes from the 4th century and prior. The most important point about Fulda made in this book is this:

image.png

5 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Lipsius places the use of patibulum in the section of modus rarus.

Historically, I would agree. Recall that, as you said, crucifixions on simple poles had been known since the 10th century BCE. I can't imagine the mass executions taking the time for a public flogging, a public riot, and a humiliating parade through the streets in the manner of the patibulum-associated two-beam executions. There were mass executions in the century or so prior to Jesus, and the first century itself. I believe, numerically, a simple-pole stauros/crux was clearly more common.

I would only expect the patibulum to be part of the process in those special cases where a public humiliation was part of the process, such as one might expect if the person had gained some notoriety, or if especially he had claimed to be a "King of the Jews" for example. 

Also, the April 8, 1963 Awake! magazine, referred to earlier, speaks of the evolution of the meaning of stauros over the centuries based on developing Roman execution practices. The research in that Awake! admits that the stauros could mean a dual-beamed cross, and therefore aligns with the research from Leolaia, but with the Biblical interpretation in the Awake! leaning more on xylon rather then stauros. This was why Leolaia pointed out the logical blunder made in that same Awake! in its incorrect explanation of xylon.

Still, notice that in spite of the very context you quoted, Lipsius still ends up putting the crucifixion of Jesus in this modus rarus category. In addition several of the styles of execution and "crux punishments" on a simple pole were also in the modus rarus category.

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • Mic Drop

      Mic Drop 95

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JW Insider

      JW Insider 9,696

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SuzA

      SuzA 25

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.