be gone the standing empty cross

[RabbiO]

You do know that the NT was written in Koine Greek right? The fact that you are using the Jewish version is suspect since JWs believe that they replaced Jews? You don't even use the Jewish tetragrammaton YHWH as the name of God and replaced it with Jehovah which is not an accurate translation.

Please do not mistake the “Complete Jewish Bible” as being the Jewish version of anything. The only good thing I can say about it is that most Jews are totally unaware of its existence.

 

[locust]

Really? And you think the JW fixation with the narrow literal reading of stauros – in the face of ample evidence to the contrary – doesn't?

its likely you dont understand how death happens on a pole or how it would happen on a cross. the other two men that died that day ,died on poles not on cross' . i'm not saying cross' were never used throughout history . it can take days for someone to die when hung on a cross.

if a person is hung ,by the hands from up above their head , they have hours to live . the whole purpose of letting them hang for a few hours and then returning to break the legs was to make the person die even faster . that does not happen to anyone hung with the arms to the side , the forces on the body are different . medical science bears this out.
the church's want to tell you Jesus was taken off the cross as it was standing . the thing is ,if the cross was stood it would also be laid down with Jesus still attached to it. its by far easier to lay it all down and then remove the dead body then to climb up .

 

[Thomas]

its likely you dont understand how death happens on a pole or how it would happen on a cross.

Oh, I do.

i'm not saying cross' were never used throughout history.

Nor can you say the crucifixion in this instance was definitely a pole ... so we're back to you arguing from nothing ...

the church's want to tell you Jesus was taken off the cross as it was standing.

Does it? Never mentioned to me. Straw Man Fallacy, chum.

All we know is that Joseph sought permission to bury the body. I don't know what you've been told, but I'd go back and ask for evidence.

+++

Until there is definitive evidence that the means of execution was a pole, then I'll go with Occam's Razor – for some 17-1800 years it was a cross, and then relatively recently, based on uncertain assumptions, it was said to be a pole.

Until evidence emerges that renders the pole argument irrefutable, I choose not to place too much faith in something that is so uncertain.

 

[locust]

Oh, I do.

evidently not ... so go ahead and tell us what you know .

 

[locust]

Two Questions About Crucifixion - The BAS Library

Despite the uncertainties and controversies concerning Jesus’ life and death, there is universal agreement about at least one thing: He was crucified. Yet even here questions have been raised, questions about the physical cause of death and about how people were nailed to the cross. I would like...

library.biblicalarchaeology.org

 

[locust]

All we know is that Joseph sought permission to bury the body. I don't know what you've been told, but I'd go back and ask for evidence.

its all very well known what happen to the body . I am abit confused why you thought it should be mentioned.its not in dispute ,is it ?

 

[Thomas]

Re: post 125:

Two Questions About Crucifixion - The BAS Library

Despite the uncertainties and controversies concerning Jesus’ life and death, there is universal agreement about at least one thing: He was crucified. Yet even here questions have been raised, questions about the physical cause of death and about how people were nailed to the cross. I would like...

library.biblicalarchaeology.org

Two Questions About Crucifixion
Does the victim die of asphyxiation? Would nails in the hand hold the weight of the body?[/URL]
It would seem:

1: Does the victim die of asphyxiation?
It would seem so. Suspension from the wrists above the head would appear to lead to death from asphyxiation within a matter of minutes.

2: Would the nails in the hand hold the weight of the body?
Yes.

The article concludes that Jesus died from shock, the cumulative effects of his punishment as recorded in the Passion narrative, having been crucified with arms outstretched. Furthermore that as neither Jesus nor the two crucified alongside Him appear to have died within minutes, in fact it would appear they were there for a few hours, then suspension/asphyxiation appears unlikely, leading to the assumption that crucifixion was with arms outstretched, fixed to a horizontal patibulum,supported on an upright stipes.

As an aside in light of this, Josephus' account of the rescue of three friends who were crucified, required him to make a 10-mile journey from the site of execution to the camp at Jerusalem, explain his case to the commander, receive an OK, then make the 10-mile journey back ... and that would have taken longer than a few minutes – and that does not factor in ow long they'd been crucified for when he first saw them. Two of the three subsequently failed to respond to treatment, but the third recovered ... that again suggests to me they were not suspended, arms above the head, on a pole.

 

[Thomas]

I am abit confused why you thought it should be mentioned.its not in dispute ,is it ?

No, read the reply again – it was in response to your fallacious comment that 'the church's want to tell you Jesus was taken off the cross as it was standing.'

 

[Thomas]

So, to repeat –

Unless and until there is definitive evidence that the means of execution was suspension on a vertical, I'll go with tradition and scholarship.

To reiterate:
stauros has the primary reading of an upright stake, but there is sufficient evidence to suggest the term was used generically to refer to any means of execution employed by the Romans where the victim is somehow suspended – be it pole or cross – the insistence of 'torture stake' based solely on a narrow literal reading is insufficient argument.

There is sufficient evidence to argue the Romans used a variety of methods to execute.

Whatever method was used, the strong implication is that death took longer than a few minutes – so suspension with arms above the head is unlikely.

In one telling instance the NWT adds a word to the text to completely alter the meaning – so eradicates their argument for scriptural accuracy or authenticity – the translation was done with a view to a version that fits a presupposed dogma.

+++

I suggest we leave it there.

 

[locust]

As an aside in light of this, Josephus' account of the rescue of three friends who were crucified, required him to make a 10-mile journey from the site of execution to the camp at Jerusalem, explain his case to the commander, receive an OK, then make the 10-mile journey back ... and that would have taken longer than a few minutes – and that does not factor in ow long they'd been crucified for when he first saw them. Two of the three subsequently failed to respond to treatment, but the third recovered ... that again suggests to me they were not suspended, arms above the head, on a pole.

I never said the cross was never used to execute (see #122). fact is it can take days for some one to die when hung on a cross . the person gets no food ,no water .
no one comes to break the legs as was done to the two others that were hung along with Jesus .
what Josephus did or did not do is irrelevant to the issues of the things done to Jesus .

 

[locust]

2: Would the nails in the hand hold the weight of the body?
Yes.

as in the case of Jesus ....no..is the correct answer .
tests were done to/with cadavers . the human hand fails unless the body is supported in other ways . perhaps you have seen pictures of Jesus hanging on a cross with rope wrapped around the arms to the cross member ? that was not the case with the hanging of Jesus .
the church's have told you ,told you wrongly . you don't like that ?

 

[Thomas]

as in the case of Jesus ....

In your opinion ... although the article you cited said 'yes' and identified the upper part of the palm of the hand as being entirely suitable – so you've rather shot yourself in the foot there.

To add to your complications, the only scriptural reference to the 'hand' is in John 20:25-29, the famous resurrection appearance before Thomas:
"But he (Thomas) said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands (Gk: χείρ cheir[/]) the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side ... Then saith he (Jesus) to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing."
The Greek word 'χείρ' cheir[/], means the limb from shoulder to the tips of the fingers. There was no Greek term for wrist. If the scribe wanted to specify the hand particularly, they would write 'the top of the cheiros'.

So on the forensic argument of nails in hand or wrist, biblically of little value. By the 2nd century Latin writers were using the Latin for 'hand', but then that was assumed from oral tradition.

As I understand it, some argue the hand can support the body, and others have pointed out the base of the hand, close to the wrist, and so on ... doesn't really matter, doesn't contradict Scripture.

Thomas did say "the print of the nails (Gk: 'ἧλος' hēlos)) and helos means stud, nail, spike, etc...
And he mentions the wound in the side, but there's no mention of nails in the feet ...

 

[Faithfulservant]

The legs were broken because they had to be dead due to the Sabbath. Jesus was already gone which is why they pierced His body. The breaking of the legs was so they couldn't use them to support their weight which caused them to asphyxiate.

 

[locust]

So, to repeat –

Unless and until there is definitive evidence that the means of execution was suspension on a vertical, I'll go with Josephus and scholarship.

that is where the church got you..you said tradition . So right or wrong you will go with tradition assuming the church got it right. the blind leading the blind. both will fall into a deep ditch

 

[locust]

The legs were broken because they had to be dead due to the Sabbath. Jesus was already gone which is why they pierced His body. The breaking of the legs was so they couldn't use them to support their weight which caused them to asphyxiate.

yep that's the way it happens when hung on a pole suspended by the hands .

 

[Thomas]

that is where the church got you..you said tradition . So right or wrong you will go with tradition assuming the church got it right. the blind leading the blind. both will fall into a deep ditch

Werll my tradition has a lot more going for it than yours, so you will excuse me ...

 

[wil]

that is where the church got you..you said tradition . So right or wrong you will go with tradition assuming the church got it right. the blind leading the blind. both will fall into a deep ditch

Really? That is the stance of one Christian vs other Christians on an interfaith discussion board?

Has anyone read the words purported to be said by Jesus?

 

[locust]

Thomas did say "the print of the nails (Gk: 'ἧλος' hēlos)) and helos means stud, nail, spike, etc...
And he mentions the wound in the side, but there's no mention of nails in the feet ...

using Deductive reasoning we have reason to believe that the feet were also nailed .after all tradition says his feet were nailed . we dare not go against tradition . right ?

Luke 24:39​

 

[Faithfulservant]

We know the feet were nailed.

1 cross + 3 nails = 4given

 

[locust]

a nail through the heel bone .the nail is just long enough to go through one foot not two. same nail would also be just long enough to go through one hand at time = 4 nails