06-04-2008, 06:39 AM
gbausc Wrote:Shlama all,
The following verse which Keith earlier asked about supports the "cross" position over a "stake":
The Nature of the cross
(the disciples) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0dymlt[/font] (to him) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]hl[/font] (& were saying) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nyrm0[/font]
(to them) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nwhl[/font] (said) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]rm0[/font] (but) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nyd[/font] (he) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]wh[/font] (our Lord) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nrml[/font] (we have seen) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nyzx[/font]
(in His hands) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]yhwdyab[/font] (I) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n0[/font] (see) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0zx[/font] (unless) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0l0[/font]
(I) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n0[/font] (& shall put) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0mrw[/font] (of the nails) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0ccd[/font] (the places) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0tykwd[/font]
(my hand) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]ydy0[/font] (I) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n0[/font] (& reach) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]+$wmw[/font] (my fingers) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]yt9bc[/font] (in them) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nyhb[/font]
( I ) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n0[/font] (shall believe) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nmyhm[/font] (not) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0l[/font] (in His side) [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]hnpdb[/font]
The Aramaic-English Interlinear New Testament
And the disciples were saying to him,
"We have seen Our Lord???, but he said to them,
???Unless I see in his hands the places of the
nails and I shall put my fingers in them, and
reach my hand into his side, I will not
believe."John 20:25 The Original Aramaic New Testament in Plain English (in Estrangela font)
The above verse shows that Yeshua was not nailed to a stake, as Jehovah???s Witnesses claim. How so? If a man were nailed to a stake, two nails would be used- one for the hands and one for the feet. Think about it. Why use more than that, from a Roman point of view? In order to use more, the hands would either be placed one above the other (which would put all the upper body weight on one hand), or they would be placed on either side of the beam, but what sense is there in that?
Josephus-Wars of The Jews
???When, therefore, Vespasian looked upon himself as in a manner besieged by these sallies of the Jews, and when his banks were now not far from the walls, he determined to make use of his battering ram. This battering ram is a vast beam of wood like the mast of a ship, its forepart is armed with a thick piece of iron at the head of it, which is so carved as to be like the head of a ram, whence its name is taken. This ram is slung in the air by ropes passing over its middle, and is hung like the balance in a pair of scales from another beam, and braced by strong beams that pass on both sides of it, in the nature of a cross. When this ram is pulled backward by a great number of men with united force, and then thrust forward by the same men, with a mighty noise, it batters the walls with that iron part which is prominent. Nor is there any tower so strong, or walls so broad, that can resist any more than its first batteries, but all are forced to yield to it at last.???
Josephus-Antiquities (Notice Josephus' description of a battering ram with 3 pieces of wood, 2 on either side of the main large beam, as being like a cross.)
8. On the next day, when the Philistines came to strip their enemies that were slain, they got the bodies of Saul and of his sons, and stripped them, and cut off their heads; and they sent messengers all about their country, to acquaint them that their enemies were fallen; and they dedicated their armor in the temple of Astarte, but hung their bodies on crosses at the walls of the city Bethshun, which is now called Scythepolls.
3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
(According to Josephus' 1st century Jewish account from Israel, Jesus was condemned to the cross. His previous description leaves little doubt the nature of a cross (Greek - "Stauros".)
Wikipedia-
The earliest artistic representations of the Crucifixion show Christ on a cross. If they also show the two thieves, these too are on crosses. Not until the second millennium are the two thieves shown as executed on stakes or trees. Not until the twentieth century is Jesus himself shown (in a Jehovah's Witnesses publication) as dying on a stake.
The first form of that which is called the Christian Cross, found on Christian monuments there, is the unequivocal Pagan Tau, or Egyptian 'Sign of life'. Let the reader peruse the following statement of Sir G. Wilkinson: 'A still more curious fact may be mentioned respecting this hieroglyphical character [the Tau], that the early Christians of Egypt adopted it in lieu of the cross, which was afterwards substituted for it, prefixing it to inscriptions in the same manner as the cross in later times. For, though Dr. Young had some scruples in believing the statement of Sir A. Edmonstone, that it holds that position in the sepulchres of the great Oasis, I can attest that such is the case, and that numerous inscriptions, headed by the Tau, are preserved to the present day on early Christian monuments.' The drift of this statement is evidently this, that in Egypt the earliest form of that which has since been called the cross, was no other than the 'Crux Ansata', or 'Sign of life', borne by Osiris and all the Egyptian gods; that the ansa or 'handle' was afterwards dispensed with, and that it became the simple Tau, or ordinary cross, as it appears at this day, and that the design of its first employment on the sepulchres, therefore, could have no reference to the crucifixion of the Nazarene, but was simply the result of the attachment to old and long cherished Pagan symbols, which is always strong in those who, with the adoption of the Christian name and profession, are still, to a large extent, Pagan in heart and feeling. This, and this only, is the origin of the worship of the 'cross'. This, no doubt, will appear all very strange and very incredible to those who have read Church history, as most have done to a large extent, even amongst Protestants, through Romish spectacles; and especially to those who call to mind the famous story told of the miraculous appearance of the cross to Constantine on the day before the decisive victory at the Milvian bridge, that decided the fortunes of avowed Paganism and nominal Christianity.
The cross as a Christian symbol or "seal" came into use at least as early as the second century (see "Apost. Const." iii. 17; Epistle of Barnabas, xi.-xii.; Justin, "Apologia," i. 55-60; "Dial. cum Tryph." 85-97); and the marking of a cross upon the forehead and the chest was regarded as a talisman against the powers of demons (Tertullian, "De Corona," iii.; Cyprian, "Testimonies," xi. 21-22; Lactantius, "Divin?? Institutiones," iv. 27, and elsewhere). Accordingly the Christian Fathers had to defend themselves, as early as the second century, against the charge of being worshipers of the cross, as may be learned from Tertullian, "Apologia," xii., xvii., and Minucius Felix, "Octavius," xxix. Christians used to swear by the power of the cross (see Apocalypse of Mary, viii., in James, "Texts and Studies," iii. 118).[8]
What is the second century "sign of the cross" or "marking of a cross on the forehead and chest"? Shall we say it was a sign of a stake? A stake has no symbol or symbolic value.
What nonsense!
If this is a trivial matter, then why is it ever brought up as a topic of discussion? Apparently Jehovah's Witnesses think it's important. Personally, it grates on me when people cavil against the cross and argue for a stake. It seems to be a symbolic way of demeaning the historic Christian faith and an attempt to redefine the entire Christian faith as something "off the beam", as it were. <!-- s--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="
Perhaps this is not a trivial matter. It may be the "crux" of Christianity. Look up the etymology of "crux" if you don't know it.
18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:
19 Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.) Philippians 3
But let it not be for me to take pride except
in the crucifixion (cross) of Our Lord Yeshua The
Messiah, in whom the universe has been
crucified to me, and I have been crucified to
the universe. Galatians 6:14
I would not deface an American flag, because it represents my country and constitution, and all who gave their lives to secure and defend it.
I will not remain silent before the defacing of a far greater symbol- the cross, for it represents all that is Holy and Good and True; it represents The Father, The Son and The Spirit of Holiness and the price and sacrifice God paid to redeem us all, even His very Blood, Life and Body.
When I survey the wondrous cross
On which The Prince of Glory died
My richest gain I count but loss
And pour contempt on all my pride.
Forbid it Lord, that I should boast
save in the cross of Christ my God
All the vain things that charm me most
I sacrifice them to His blood
See, from His head, His hands, His feet
Sorrow and love flow mingled down
Did e'er such love and sorrow meet
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?
Were the whole realm of nature mine
That were a present far too small
Love so amazing, so Divine
Demands my soul, my life, my all. -Isaac Watts 1674-1748 (Hymn-"When I survey The Wondrous Cross")
Dave Bauscher
Hi Dave and thanks for the comprehensive work put forward. My initial questioning about the cross 'symbol' came about because of the prior renderings throughout Tanakh regarding the 'tree'. I am about to ask Andrew but thought I would reply to you first.
Blessings,
Mark