Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: What did Jesus die on?
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs
ShaunZero
QUOTE
Did Jesus die on a stake or a cross?



One of the doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses that is wrong, though not an attack on an essential doctrine of scripture, is their teaching that Jesus died on a stake instead of a cross (Reasoning from the Scriptures, 1985, pp. 89-90). It really doesn't matter which Jesus died on. The issue is whether or not He shed His blood for our sins.
In support of their position, they accurately state that the Greek word used in many Bibles which is translated into "cross" is the Greek word "stauros" which means, "an upright stake, esp. a pointed one, a cross."1 If a stake were used, instead of a cross, then Jesus' hands would have been placed above His head with a nail driven through His wrists. Since the wrists would most likely overlap, only one nail is needed through both wrists. However, some Jehovah's Witnesses have maintained that Jesus' hands may have been placed one higher than another on the stake. The reason they say this is because of John 20:25,

"The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe."

Notice the use of the word nails (plural) in reference to hands (plural). This is strong evidence that Jesus was crucified on a cross with outstretched hands -- one nail in each hand which would explain the plural nails. If Jesus was crucified on a stake then both hands would have been placed above his head and only one nail would have been needed to go through both hands. Again, it says "...in his hands the print of the nails..."
Again, this is not an issue of essential doctrine, but I do believe the evidence is sufficient to demonstrate that the Watchtower organization is incorrect in yet another matter.


Source

Both have evidence, wich one do you beleive?

1) The evidence can point to Jesus being nailed to a stake with one hand above the other because stauros can translate to an up-right stake. Even though it would be more likley to nail one nail through 2 wrists, it would seem easier in my opinion to do one at a time(IE: one above the other). And people don't always use the wisest choices, so we can't really say what they chose to do.

2) Evidence that it was on a cross was just simply that it said nails, although that can also support the "one hand above the other-stake nailing".

JMPD1
And, does it matter which?

According to the christians, he died for their sins. Doesn't matter if it was a cross, a stake, or being stoned to death. The REASON for him being a sacrifice is important, not the method of his execution
Purplos
I saw a show once about how Jesus was crucified. Unfortunately, I can't remember the name of the show or I'd go find a link.

They were saying that historically, crosses weren't used -- more of a "T" shaped piece, and instead of the feet being crossed in front like on lots of pictures, there was actually a little cross beam the condemned could stand on with their toes. The feet were positioned on either side of the main upright and the nails driven sideways thru the ankle. They had bones of other crucified criminals that showed the broken ankle bones that supported this - one even with nail still in.

Also, the regular modus operandi was to tie the upper arms with rope to the cross beam - not just hang by the nails in the wrists. Often, people would have to carry the top cross beam on their shoulders thru the streets to where the upright was permanently planted in the ground. They guy they had playing Jesus was able to stumble with the crossbeam about 1/4 mile to where the upright was planted. He couldn't move a full wooden cross more than 10 feet. Of course, this was Jesus, so I guess he could've carried anything, but it wouldn't make sense for the government to use a regular method of punishment & death that normal people would just not be able to do.

Tying a guy to an actual cross and then putting it upright and securing it in the ground took hours and 7 guys without modern tools and ropes w/ spikes in the ground to hold it up. Having an already erected upright, the cross beam of the "T" could be easily hefted and slipped onto the top of the upright with just two guys in a minute or two.

It made sense, both logically and historically.
101
QUOTE(JMPD1 @ Nov 16 2005, 09:28 AM) [snapback]934734[/snapback]

And, does it matter which?

According to the christians, he died for their sins. Doesn't matter if it was a cross, a stake, or being stoned to death. The REASON for him being a sacrifice is important, not the method of his execution


Exactly JMPD. I don't think it matters either way. A cricifix is only a symbol. But Jesus blood is what saved us. ( Christians and whosoever will)
~TheArtOfContact~
Actually, the cross is what is meant to be used to 'neutralize' the powers of Jesus Christ. So being that it doesn't matter, it is important to understand that even though those who crucified him- may not have believed in the powers......so why 'neutralize' him if they didn't believe in the powers??

It was important to incapacitate his hands some way or another.... it's where a lot of his power was used in his body. So....why even ask what he did die on, it isn't obvious enough? Have you heard of the 'shroud of Turin'? It's probably - potentially the only evidence that he did die on the cross, if it was Jesus imprinted on the shroud.
Yelekiah
I don't think it matters what he died on, but it's possible it was in the shape of a T, instead of the traditional cross. A lot of Romans used that.
~TheArtOfContact~
On the T shape there wouldn't be an "INRI"....to post...Why would people make that up if he was crucified any different than on a cross?
JMPD1
what? Why wouldn't there be an "INRI" to post? It would go at the intersection of the "T", or naild to the stake over his head.
ShaunZero
It doesn't matter at all, but I'm just curious.
draconic chronicler
At the time Christianity became the accepted religion of the Roman empire "crucifixion was still a routine form of execution. It was a fact of life not shrouded in any kind of mystery. The acknowledgement that it was a "cross" goes back to those times when this form of execution was common knowledge. This is really a "no brainer".
Paranoid Android
Hmm, interesting. never thought of anything other than a traditional cross. But as has been said, the thought rolling through my head is: Does it matter?

The answer, a resounding no.

Regards, PA
~TheArtOfContact~
Unless he's just curious about what kind of pain Christ suffered and how.
justcallmefox
I've heard that the Romans used several types of crosses for crucifixion- 'T' shape, something similar to a goalpost, "Y" shape, and 'X', as well.
JMPD1 is right, though. For Christianity, the importance is in the sacrifice, not the method of death.
ShaunZero
It's not the importance I care about, I was just curious, =P
Knothere
Arms outstretched was the common practice as it left the victim totally incapacitated. Crucifixion could take a long time to kill someone, and often death in this manner went unsupervised. Staking the arm directly overhead affords the victim leverage, certainly something you don't want to give someone not mortally wounded left to die from exhaustion & or affixiation.
Lord Umbarger
I know, I know! He died on time!

No really, we may never be sure about the death of one of the thousands that the Romans executed. I hear that they got pretty creative from time to time. Of course you have to admit, if he was actually nailed to a stake instead of a cross, all those x-tian necklesses would look pretty funny!
JMPD1
colonel mustard did it in the billiard room with the candlestick......


sorry, a brief squall of levity struck unexpectedly, causing the above answer to the title of this thread.

We now resume normal operations.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.