17th Angel
לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות
- Messages
- 9,437
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 0
Quahom1 said:Happy holidays to you as well...soldier
*salutes*
Thanks brother, you take care and I wish you and your family a great festive season!
Trinity? Stake Vs Cross Vs Tree
- Thread starter 17th Angel
- Start date
*salutes*
Thanks brother, you take care and I wish you and your family a great festive season!
InquisitiveInHalifax
Established Member
17th Angel said:Site is interesting alot of information just going through it at the moment, one thing I would like to mention I browsed first scanning top to bottom and at the bottom it says as follows...
Papal Crucifix 8 inch $21.95
Catechism of Catholic Church - OSV HC / SC $29.95
St. Benedict Stained Cherry Crucifix - 10.5 inch $48.00
Catholicism for Dummies $21.99
SS Miraculous Medal on 24 inch chain $37.00
The Essential Catholic Handbook of the Sacraments $13.95
Daily Missal - 1962 Tridentine Rite (Latin Rite) Black / White Leather $54.95
.... and then,
The Chronicles of Narnia (Modern Cover) Boxed Set, SC $45.00
.. Is it just me? That strikes as odd??
Actually C.S. Lewis, the author of The Chronicles of Narnia, is a christian author of some reknown. If you've read the series (I just finished them last month, quite late I know) there is a lot of christian ideology there. Actually the further I got in the series the more blatant it was and I started to get a little bored with it, felt like deja vu from sunday school. For example the lion, Aslan (creator of Narnia), allowed himself to be put to death to save a little boy then came back to life to save Narnia. Aslan's father is the Great Emporer across the sea....I think you can see what I mean. I hope I didn't give too much away if you intend to read them, the book in which that takes place has just been adapted for the big screen 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe', not too bad for a kids movie!
InquisitiveInHalifax said:
Perhaps that is due to the fact that he deliberately wrote Christian themes into his books which were deliberately directed towards children.
Prior to his conversion to Christianity, Lewis was an atheist. However his good friend J.R.R. Tolkien's arguments along with Chesterson's "The Everlasting Man", gave him pause to reconsider (1929). By 1931 Lewis came back to his Christian heritage.
He has written much more than Christian based books, (to include science fiction, prose and poetry), and was the first Professor of Medival and Renaissence literature at Cambridge. He is also noted for some thought provoking quotes.
"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell."
"Aim at heave and you will get earth thrown in. Aim at earth and you get neither."
"A man who is eating or lying with his wife or preparing to go to sleep in humility, thankfulness and temperance, is by Christian standards, in an infinitely higher state than one who is listening to Bach or reading Plato in a state of pride."
These are just a few of his many quotes.
v/r
Q
17th Angel
לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות
- Messages
- 9,437
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 0
InquisitiveInHalifax said:
Yeah I downloa..... uhm, went to the "cinema" yesterday, and saw Narnia... I instantly related the lion to Jesus Christ..... Only in realtion to his deeds... nothing else... obviously he is just a character, and if real he would just be an animal.... no real importance... heh.
I however didn't relate anything else to Christianity... anyway.. It wasn't bad... Got Harry Potter, goblet of fire too... That was a poor film... I cannot believe they swore in it. Anyway that storyline is getting too old.. I cannot believe people read the books of that and still are interested.....
Potter goes to school first time!!
wow awesome, oh no some dude called Volldermort? or something he wants to kill him!! oh dear!!! lucky the goof without any skill or talent uses others to defeat him... well that was fun...2nd Potter goes back to school! wow awesome, oh no some dude called volldermort is back and wants to kill him!! oh dear!! lucky that goof can sponge off others talents and skills to save his behind!! well that was fun...
3rd potter..... he goes back to school again... oh no, here comes some dude, and he is called voldermort, and yes, he is trying to kill potter... lucky, the coward potter uses others around him again and SAVES THE DAY!!! Oh this story line is soooo orginial... Can't wait for what surprises are in the next one!
4th potter... yes he goes back to school... voldermort, sponge, lucky uses others saves day..... meh...
Who here honestly likes these films? *loads rifle* hands up.
(edits)
OH and what is with those fools?! the baddy is always the defender agaisnt black arts!!! Err.... I am going to go and so something to distract my mind from how tedious, repetitive and annoying those films are.... anyway this trinity subject is kinda wandering off onto some unknown direction... I still say the Trinity isn't important.
M
mee
Guest
17th Angel said:Who can offer me views, opinions, scriptures and history that back that Jesus was killed via;
stake
cross
tree
Also I would like to hear the importantce of the Trinity, Thanks!
In classical Greek the word (stau·ros´) primarily denotes an upright stake, or pole, and there is no evidence that the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures used it to designate a stake with a crossbeam
The book The Non-Christian Cross, by John Denham Parsons, states: "There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . it is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape."—London, 1896, pp. 23, 24.
mee said:
The historical evidence that the Romans used a "stake with a cross beam" to execute criminals is in abundance. The logic is that if the Romans used crossed stakes to execute criminals and the Romans executed Jesus, then it is logical to assume that the Romans put Jesus on a crossed stake. It does not necessarrily mean that the crossed stake was in the shape of a lower case t. It could have as easily been an X.
v/r
Q
Excerpt from Wikipedia:
Cross shape
The horizontal beam of the cross, or transom, could be fixed at the very top of the vertical piece, the upright, to form a capital T called a tau cross or Saint Anthony's cross. The horizontal beam could also be affixed at some distance below the top, often in a mortise, to form a lowercase t-shape called a Latin cross, more often depicted in Christian imagery. Alternatively, the cross could consist of two diagonal beams to form an X, alternatively known as the decussate cross (after decem, Latin for 'ten', insofar as 'X' is the Roman numeral for ten) or as Saint Andrew's cross. (This shape may be recognized from its white-on-blue manifestation in the flag of Scotland.)
For reasons of simplicity, a single, upright wooden pole (crux simplex), with no transom at all, was also often used for ancient crucifixions; the original Greek word for "cross" (stauros) is generally understood to indicate a simple upright pole or stake. On such, malefactors were nailed for execution.
Both the noun, and the verb staurein, "to fasten to a stake or pole", are distinct from the ecclesiastical symbol of the two-beamed "cross". According to some theories, the shape of the latter had its origin in ancient Babylonia as the symbol of the god Tammuz, being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the Greek initial of his name. By the middle of the 3rd century AD, pagans received into the churches sometimes retained their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, with the cross-piece lowered, is said to have been adopted to stand for the "cross" of Christ. Of course, this theory that the cross symbol was adopted purely as a symbol from pagan practice seemingly overlooks all the archaeological and literary evidence discussed elsewhere in this article, that actual crosses were indeed used as a very real means of execution.
Cross shape
The horizontal beam of the cross, or transom, could be fixed at the very top of the vertical piece, the upright, to form a capital T called a tau cross or Saint Anthony's cross. The horizontal beam could also be affixed at some distance below the top, often in a mortise, to form a lowercase t-shape called a Latin cross, more often depicted in Christian imagery. Alternatively, the cross could consist of two diagonal beams to form an X, alternatively known as the decussate cross (after decem, Latin for 'ten', insofar as 'X' is the Roman numeral for ten) or as Saint Andrew's cross. (This shape may be recognized from its white-on-blue manifestation in the flag of Scotland.)
For reasons of simplicity, a single, upright wooden pole (crux simplex), with no transom at all, was also often used for ancient crucifixions; the original Greek word for "cross" (stauros) is generally understood to indicate a simple upright pole or stake. On such, malefactors were nailed for execution.
Both the noun, and the verb staurein, "to fasten to a stake or pole", are distinct from the ecclesiastical symbol of the two-beamed "cross". According to some theories, the shape of the latter had its origin in ancient Babylonia as the symbol of the god Tammuz, being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the Greek initial of his name. By the middle of the 3rd century AD, pagans received into the churches sometimes retained their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, with the cross-piece lowered, is said to have been adopted to stand for the "cross" of Christ. Of course, this theory that the cross symbol was adopted purely as a symbol from pagan practice seemingly overlooks all the archaeological and literary evidence discussed elsewhere in this article, that actual crosses were indeed used as a very real means of execution.
M
mee
Guest
but what does the bible say , for me i am interested what the bible is saying about this word stau-ros ,not assuming things that might of happened.Quahom1 said:
mee said:
Fair enough, then read on in the Greek scriptures as to what Jesus carried on his way to Golgotha. I believe you will find that He specifically carried a "cross piece" or "cross beam", not the whole of the cross, or even the Stauros (which is already buried in the ground like a fence post. Also we know He would not have carried the entire cross...He couldn't carry it (as it would weigh in excess of 300 lbs). He couldn't even carry the cross beam (weighing in at 75-120 lbs), because He was so weak from the flogging.
If you don't believe He died on a cross, that is fine too.
v/r
Q
for me i am interested what the bible is saying about this word stau-ros ,not assuming things that might of happened.
Early Christian writers without exception wrote the language of their time, the Greek Koine... The New Testament has very little relationship to the artificial representation of the language of Attic [Greek] prose in the literature and rhetoric of the Roman imperial period... [With the exception of the Epistle to the Hebrews,] the other books of the New Testament... as well as other early Christian writings, are dominated by the vernacular language."
(Introduction to the New Testament, Volume One: History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982, page 107).
To understand what the bible says, one must first understand the language, and the Greek of the NT is vernacular. I would suggest that if you asked anyone of the day what was the most common method of Roman punishment execution they would describe the cross as we know it,a cross-piece attached to a vertical stake.
Certainly most of the Roman writers did - even when they referred to it as a tree, as in the case of Pliny.
There is a piece of anti-Christian graffiti from the 3rd century depicting a man kneeling in prayer before the image of a man with an ass's head crucified on a cross. The point is, the graffiti ridicules what must by then have been a common practice - prayer addressed to a crucified Christ. The cross depicted is just as we know it, and as it was used up until abolished by Constantine in the fourth century.
Thomas
Early Christian writers without exception wrote the language of their time, the Greek Koine... The New Testament has very little relationship to the artificial representation of the language of Attic [Greek] prose in the literature and rhetoric of the Roman imperial period... [With the exception of the Epistle to the Hebrews,] the other books of the New Testament... as well as other early Christian writings, are dominated by the vernacular language."
(Introduction to the New Testament, Volume One: History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982, page 107).
To understand what the bible says, one must first understand the language, and the Greek of the NT is vernacular. I would suggest that if you asked anyone of the day what was the most common method of Roman punishment execution they would describe the cross as we know it,a cross-piece attached to a vertical stake.
Certainly most of the Roman writers did - even when they referred to it as a tree, as in the case of Pliny.
There is a piece of anti-Christian graffiti from the 3rd century depicting a man kneeling in prayer before the image of a man with an ass's head crucified on a cross. The point is, the graffiti ridicules what must by then have been a common practice - prayer addressed to a crucified Christ. The cross depicted is just as we know it, and as it was used up until abolished by Constantine in the fourth century.
Thomas
Hello Thomas
Your quote:
"Early Christian writers without exception wrote the language of their time, the Greek Koine... The New Testament has very little relationship to the artificial representation of the language of Attic [Greek] prose in the literature and rhetoric of the Roman imperial period... [With the exception of the Epistle to the Hebrews,] the other books of the New Testament... as well as other early Christian writings, are dominated by the vernacular language."
(Introduction to the New Testament, Volume One: History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982, page 107)."
Scholars do have enough understanding of the Koine Greek so as to give a fairly good translation and to obtain the concept found from the original Koine Greek. If we say that they don't, then we might as well discount all of the NT scriptures as never attaining the original sense and not only where the word stauros (stake) is used.
Along with this, as believers in God and his written word, we all alike believe that the scriptures are inspired of God, (I think !) and we should have confidence in him that he will make certain that the correct sense of the scriptures is be passed onto us. So the original word for stake... stauros, context etc. can be looked into in-depth.
Your quote:
To understand what the bible says, one must first understand the language, and the Greek of the NT is vernacular. I would suggest that if you asked anyone of the day what was the most common method of Roman punishment execution they would describe the cross as we know it,a cross-piece attached to a vertical stake.
Vernacular, relatively speaking in the sense that Koine Greek was different than classical Greek. True the most common form of death torture was on a cross shape, various shapes, it seems, but a stake was also known to have been used in death and torture, in fact the upright pole was the original form. It seems that the stake as a means of death by torture was handed down by previous civilisations and empires and taken up by the Romans, cross forms are a variation of this. The Greeks used it, and there is a stone frieze in the Assyryian king Sennacheribs palace at Ninevah showing many impaled on posts, amongst other historical pointers.
Your quote:
There is a piece of anti-Christian graffiti from the 3rd century depicting a man kneeling in prayer before the image of a man with an ass's head crucified on a cross. The point is, the graffiti ridicules what must by then have been a common practice - prayer addressed to a crucified Christ. The cross depicted is just as we know it, and as it was used up until abolished by Constantine in the fourth century.
I've seen this picture, its a rough line drawing...scrawl, and this is not evidence of a crucifixion.
This drawing was discovered in 1856 on the walls of the Roman palatine building in the servants quarters. It dates from around 200 A.D. ( Not confirmed) This "crucified ass" is a human figure but with an animals head. The arms are extended. Two lines that form a cross appear in front, not behind this graffito, traversing the arms and legs. There is an accompanying inscription which says: "Alexamenos adores his God." It has been pointed out that the lines that form this 'cross' may very well not be a part of the original graffito. Also, the head is more like a jackal than an ass and so the drawing could very well be a representation of the Egyptian god Anubis. This is certainly no evidence of a cross or a crufixion as drawn by Christians in the early 3rd century. No fixed date can be given for this drawing, again one can easily assume such a derogatory cartoon did indeed mock the Christian, but its conjecture. It's use by an opponent of the faith hardly proves that the cross was a very early Christian symbol.
Either way it is centuries later than from the actual time of the death of Jesus. Later cross symbols only reflect that the cross was a later superimposed symbol deriving from ancient history, and that a cross could have indeed been used for other Christians, but there is no evidence that any cross was used for Jesus.
Stauros:
The verb is stauroo and it means 'to impale' it is used in the scriptures to denote the impalement.... form: to impale ...on a pale or stake. The noun stauros is used for the stake. The word "stauros" occurs 27 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
Sometimes the word xylon is also used which denotes a piece of wood or even a tree. It is not like dendron, which is used of a living, or green tree, as in Matt.21: 8; Rev.7: 1, 3; 8:7; 9: 4.
There is never any Greek word used in the scriptures to imply that it was a cross of any form. Outside of the scriptures a cross is known to have been used, but also a stake was a known means of death torture. The word in the bible is more indicative of a stake, because its more direct to its actual true meaning, an upright pale, stake, palisade or pole. The subject goes a lot deeper though and the origination of the words and history on the matter are more involved than that seen on the surface. It is debatable.
Your quote:
"Early Christian writers without exception wrote the language of their time, the Greek Koine... The New Testament has very little relationship to the artificial representation of the language of Attic [Greek] prose in the literature and rhetoric of the Roman imperial period... [With the exception of the Epistle to the Hebrews,] the other books of the New Testament... as well as other early Christian writings, are dominated by the vernacular language."
(Introduction to the New Testament, Volume One: History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982, page 107)."
Scholars do have enough understanding of the Koine Greek so as to give a fairly good translation and to obtain the concept found from the original Koine Greek. If we say that they don't, then we might as well discount all of the NT scriptures as never attaining the original sense and not only where the word stauros (stake) is used.
Along with this, as believers in God and his written word, we all alike believe that the scriptures are inspired of God, (I think !) and we should have confidence in him that he will make certain that the correct sense of the scriptures is be passed onto us. So the original word for stake... stauros, context etc. can be looked into in-depth.
Your quote:
To understand what the bible says, one must first understand the language, and the Greek of the NT is vernacular. I would suggest that if you asked anyone of the day what was the most common method of Roman punishment execution they would describe the cross as we know it,a cross-piece attached to a vertical stake.
Vernacular, relatively speaking in the sense that Koine Greek was different than classical Greek. True the most common form of death torture was on a cross shape, various shapes, it seems, but a stake was also known to have been used in death and torture, in fact the upright pole was the original form. It seems that the stake as a means of death by torture was handed down by previous civilisations and empires and taken up by the Romans, cross forms are a variation of this. The Greeks used it, and there is a stone frieze in the Assyryian king Sennacheribs palace at Ninevah showing many impaled on posts, amongst other historical pointers.
Your quote:
There is a piece of anti-Christian graffiti from the 3rd century depicting a man kneeling in prayer before the image of a man with an ass's head crucified on a cross. The point is, the graffiti ridicules what must by then have been a common practice - prayer addressed to a crucified Christ. The cross depicted is just as we know it, and as it was used up until abolished by Constantine in the fourth century.
I've seen this picture, its a rough line drawing...scrawl, and this is not evidence of a crucifixion.
This drawing was discovered in 1856 on the walls of the Roman palatine building in the servants quarters. It dates from around 200 A.D. ( Not confirmed) This "crucified ass" is a human figure but with an animals head. The arms are extended. Two lines that form a cross appear in front, not behind this graffito, traversing the arms and legs. There is an accompanying inscription which says: "Alexamenos adores his God." It has been pointed out that the lines that form this 'cross' may very well not be a part of the original graffito. Also, the head is more like a jackal than an ass and so the drawing could very well be a representation of the Egyptian god Anubis. This is certainly no evidence of a cross or a crufixion as drawn by Christians in the early 3rd century. No fixed date can be given for this drawing, again one can easily assume such a derogatory cartoon did indeed mock the Christian, but its conjecture. It's use by an opponent of the faith hardly proves that the cross was a very early Christian symbol.
Either way it is centuries later than from the actual time of the death of Jesus. Later cross symbols only reflect that the cross was a later superimposed symbol deriving from ancient history, and that a cross could have indeed been used for other Christians, but there is no evidence that any cross was used for Jesus.
Stauros:
The verb is stauroo and it means 'to impale' it is used in the scriptures to denote the impalement.... form: to impale ...on a pale or stake. The noun stauros is used for the stake. The word "stauros" occurs 27 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
Sometimes the word xylon is also used which denotes a piece of wood or even a tree. It is not like dendron, which is used of a living, or green tree, as in Matt.21: 8; Rev.7: 1, 3; 8:7; 9: 4.
There is never any Greek word used in the scriptures to imply that it was a cross of any form. Outside of the scriptures a cross is known to have been used, but also a stake was a known means of death torture. The word in the bible is more indicative of a stake, because its more direct to its actual true meaning, an upright pale, stake, palisade or pole. The subject goes a lot deeper though and the origination of the words and history on the matter are more involved than that seen on the surface. It is debatable.
E99 said:
I find irony in anyone who refuses to read the entire passage. However, I will ask you E99, what did the Messiah carry to His death? Perhaps you can enlighten us.
Stauros meant stake, agreed. What is the cross beam called? And why would Jesus be forced to carry it?
And why are you ignoring my questions?
Q
Hello Quahom
Your quote:
I find irony in anyone who refuses to read the entire passage. However, I will ask you E99, what did the Messiah carry to His death? Perhaps you can enlighten us.
Stauros meant stake, agreed. What is the cross beam called? And why would Jesus be forced to carry it?
And why are you ignoring my questions?
Sorry Quahom. I did intend to answer your question. Its a challenging one and requires some thought. If you look at my last posting time, you will notice that the time says 1.45 a.m....Late ! I had to get up to work....Ran out of time. Working now, so I will get back to you later.
Your quote:
Greek for Stauros does not mean to impale. It means stake, pole, stud. Not pike, or strike for impaling one upon. Please Cut me some slack.
I know. I did say that the scriturally used word 'stauros' is a noun and means upright pole, paling, , palisade or stake, generally a single piece of wood. Impale comes from the word pale...stauros. Please check my posts. I said that the verb form 'stauroo' means ' to impale.'
Please note: Although it is part of our JW theology, I can see that it is not 100% clear cut that it was a stake, especially so with the verbal usage of languages, idioms etc. Could the word stauros during the Roman era in particular have meant only a cross ? Realistically I don't think so, but who knows. This is why I said that it is debatable...up for debate.
Your quote:
I find irony in anyone who refuses to read the entire passage. However, I will ask you E99, what did the Messiah carry to His death? Perhaps you can enlighten us.
Stauros meant stake, agreed. What is the cross beam called? And why would Jesus be forced to carry it?
And why are you ignoring my questions?
Sorry Quahom. I did intend to answer your question. Its a challenging one and requires some thought. If you look at my last posting time, you will notice that the time says 1.45 a.m....Late ! I had to get up to work....Ran out of time. Working now, so I will get back to you later.
Your quote:
Greek for Stauros does not mean to impale. It means stake, pole, stud. Not pike, or strike for impaling one upon. Please Cut me some slack.
I know. I did say that the scriturally used word 'stauros' is a noun and means upright pole, paling, , palisade or stake, generally a single piece of wood. Impale comes from the word pale...stauros. Please check my posts. I said that the verb form 'stauroo' means ' to impale.'
Please note: Although it is part of our JW theology, I can see that it is not 100% clear cut that it was a stake, especially so with the verbal usage of languages, idioms etc. Could the word stauros during the Roman era in particular have meant only a cross ? Realistically I don't think so, but who knows. This is why I said that it is debatable...up for debate.
Naw, You're right. I should have cut and run too. My apologise.
For all we know, He could have been hung on a tree. I guess it really doesn't matter because He died an ignoble death by any event, simply for preaching good news and telling the truth.
That is the problem with translations. Sometimes the meaning gets lost in the wording...
v/r
Q
For all we know, He could have been hung on a tree. I guess it really doesn't matter because He died an ignoble death by any event, simply for preaching good news and telling the truth.
That is the problem with translations. Sometimes the meaning gets lost in the wording...
v/r
Q
Hi Quahom
Sorry, a late reply, I've been busy......also delayed by three extra minutes on getting to this site through a plethora of dialogue boxes..." Do you want to remortgage ? Only $800.00 admin fees...You've won a holiday in Bermuda.....send us £3000.00 to claim your prize." etc...
Your quote:
I believe you will find that He specifically carried a "cross piece" or "cross beam", not the whole of the cross, or even the Stauros (which is already buried in the ground like a fence post. Also we know He would not have carried the entire cross...He couldn't carry it (as it would weigh in excess of 300 lbs). He couldn't even carry the cross beam (weighing in at 75-120 lbs), because He was so weak from the flogging.
I will ask you E99, what did the Messiah carry to His death? Perhaps you can enlighten us.
Stauros meant stake, agreed. What is the cross beam called? And why would Jesus be forced to carry it?
Greek: 'Stauros'...A stake, pale, palisade, upright post.
Crossbeam..... I cannot seem to find that the original Greek word found in all of the gospel accounts can justify that a crossbeam is being carried. Again, the Greek word 'Stauros' is used each and everytime when referring to the item used for the execution of Jesus. This word is used for the item that Jesus is carrying and also at Golgotha where he is impaled. It is one singular stauros...." If you are the son of God, come down of the (stauros)" ....It always means stake, pale or single upright pole etc...... a meaning without variation found in the NT scriptures and outside of the bible in classical Greek literature.
As impaling on a single stake was another method used by the Romans along with the more popular fixing to a cross form; the literal words here seem to be reasonably implying that it was actually this time round an impaling on a stake.
If we assume that 'stauros' does mean an upright pole, which is logical, regarding the direct transliteration of the word, then if it was this that Jesus carried, then this pole would have been around say 220lbs. I could carry and drag that in my younger days. I can still bench press it....just about escaping a recurring hernia. I think that it would not have been a big problem for Jesus, but still a problem nonetheless. If it was a whole cross then maybe it would have been too heavy. Although Jesus was weakened, it has been said that he, being perfect would have had a good amount of strength, but as he was weakened through his flogging, it would have been a great effort.... but he was not alone. The account reads....
"And as they came out they found a man a Cyrene, Simon by name: Him they compelled to bear his <cross.>" (stauros...stake) Matthew 27: 32.
It seems that the Romans put Simon to service, (as it says in some bibles) to either aid Jesus to carry the weight, or they expected Simon to do it himself ! It could be that Simon was an extra large sized man and the Roman soldiers picked him for that reason.
Whatever, the word found here in many bibles translates the word 'stauros' as cross without any confirmed foundation to its meaning to do so. This is a gross mistransliteration, as the literal original word stauros is generally recognised amongst many to mean a single piece of wood...a pole. It has never been used to mean two crossed pieces.
Following on from this, most bibles translate the verb stauroo...'to impale or fasten to a stake' as crucified. Again this is a misguiding use of the verb, as crucified gives the impression that Jesus is put on a cross, (from the latin Crux.) At Matthew 27: 22,23 the crowd cry out...."Let him be >Stauroo<...Impaled" and not crucified. IMHO that it should be an affixion and not a crucifixion.
Whatever, as you pointed out, it was his agonising and ignoble death, to have died for us all that has a greater meaning.
Shalohm
Sorry, a late reply, I've been busy......also delayed by three extra minutes on getting to this site through a plethora of dialogue boxes..." Do you want to remortgage ? Only $800.00 admin fees...You've won a holiday in Bermuda.....send us £3000.00 to claim your prize." etc...
Your quote:
I believe you will find that He specifically carried a "cross piece" or "cross beam", not the whole of the cross, or even the Stauros (which is already buried in the ground like a fence post. Also we know He would not have carried the entire cross...He couldn't carry it (as it would weigh in excess of 300 lbs). He couldn't even carry the cross beam (weighing in at 75-120 lbs), because He was so weak from the flogging.
I will ask you E99, what did the Messiah carry to His death? Perhaps you can enlighten us.
Stauros meant stake, agreed. What is the cross beam called? And why would Jesus be forced to carry it?
Greek: 'Stauros'...A stake, pale, palisade, upright post.
Crossbeam..... I cannot seem to find that the original Greek word found in all of the gospel accounts can justify that a crossbeam is being carried. Again, the Greek word 'Stauros' is used each and everytime when referring to the item used for the execution of Jesus. This word is used for the item that Jesus is carrying and also at Golgotha where he is impaled. It is one singular stauros...." If you are the son of God, come down of the (stauros)" ....It always means stake, pale or single upright pole etc...... a meaning without variation found in the NT scriptures and outside of the bible in classical Greek literature.
As impaling on a single stake was another method used by the Romans along with the more popular fixing to a cross form; the literal words here seem to be reasonably implying that it was actually this time round an impaling on a stake.
If we assume that 'stauros' does mean an upright pole, which is logical, regarding the direct transliteration of the word, then if it was this that Jesus carried, then this pole would have been around say 220lbs. I could carry and drag that in my younger days. I can still bench press it....just about escaping a recurring hernia. I think that it would not have been a big problem for Jesus, but still a problem nonetheless. If it was a whole cross then maybe it would have been too heavy. Although Jesus was weakened, it has been said that he, being perfect would have had a good amount of strength, but as he was weakened through his flogging, it would have been a great effort.... but he was not alone. The account reads....
"And as they came out they found a man a Cyrene, Simon by name: Him they compelled to bear his <cross.>" (stauros...stake) Matthew 27: 32.
It seems that the Romans put Simon to service, (as it says in some bibles) to either aid Jesus to carry the weight, or they expected Simon to do it himself ! It could be that Simon was an extra large sized man and the Roman soldiers picked him for that reason.
Whatever, the word found here in many bibles translates the word 'stauros' as cross without any confirmed foundation to its meaning to do so. This is a gross mistransliteration, as the literal original word stauros is generally recognised amongst many to mean a single piece of wood...a pole. It has never been used to mean two crossed pieces.
Following on from this, most bibles translate the verb stauroo...'to impale or fasten to a stake' as crucified. Again this is a misguiding use of the verb, as crucified gives the impression that Jesus is put on a cross, (from the latin Crux.) At Matthew 27: 22,23 the crowd cry out...."Let him be >Stauroo<...Impaled" and not crucified. IMHO that it should be an affixion and not a crucifixion.
Whatever, as you pointed out, it was his agonising and ignoble death, to have died for us all that has a greater meaning.
Shalohm
17th Angel
לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות
- Messages
- 9,437
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 0
Quahom1 said:Dude, you need to get rid of the spam and trojan horses in your computer...
No, I'm serious. You should not have pop ups or other stuff slowing you down. Your system is infected...
The sound of the words, Trojan and Horses, 17th ears perk like a wild cougar's his eyes turn predertory and his sight locks upon the infected and weak like the tight fatal grasp of a hawk upon a small unfortunate rodent....
*snaps out of his dramatic narrator fit*
Ugh sorry, yeah you should get any Troji viri fixed as soon as... I clearly remember in my younger years online messing around with Troji's fair enough they were fun.... but it wasn't so fun for the health status of the poor people we used to inflict our boredom upon....