|
Cross |
|
The question as to whether Jesus died on a cross or a stake it purely academic. The importance for a Christian is that Jesus died as a Ransom for the sins of mankind, not how his hands were situated. There is no direct evidence as to what Jesus himself was nailed to. However, a look into the subject reveals that it is most likely that Jesus did die on a cross.
Jehovah’s Witness belief is that Jesus died on a stake. The reason I have included this section is that when a Jehovah’s Witness sees a person with a cross the assumption is made that they are engaged in pagan idolatry. The cross becomes an ongoing form of subliminal reinforcement that Jehovah’s Witnesses have truth and Christendom is reserved for destruction as part of Babylon the Great, as indicated in the following quote;
Watchtower 1989 May 1 p.23 “There are also inanimate objects that if venerated may lead to breaking God’s commandments. Among the most prominent is the cross. For centuries it has been used by people in Christendom as part of their worship.
… Soon God will execute his judgments against all false religions. Those who cling to them will suffer their fate.”
It needs to be noted that up to the 1930’s Jehovah’s Witnesses taught that Jesus died on a cross and even included it on the cover of the Watch Tower;
Life 1929 1,000,000 ed. p.216 “Jesus was crucified upon the cross”
It was not until well into the time of Rutherford that the anti-cross teaching was developed. Rutherford started to promote the view of several Protestant preachers that the word stauros was not known as cross until Constantine introduced it 300 years after Jesus death. This was supposedly done by Constantine as a way of making Christianity more appealing to people of Pagan religions that already were using the cross as a symbol. This article shows that this is not borne out by history. There is ample evidence that in Jesus time stauros could refer to a cross, that the cross was a common form of torture and that Jesus was crucified.
Current Watchtower Reasoning
The main argument the Watchtower Society uses to disprove a cross is a linguistic one. They claim that the Greek terms stauros and xulon and the Latin term crux did not mean "cross" in the first century. The major evidence the Watchtower uses to support that stauros came to be a cross ‘later’ than Jesus time is Vine's An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words from 1948.
The Watchtower concentrates on Vine’s linguistic argument, but fails to inform its members of the volume of evidence that Jesus did die on a cross. Vine’s Expository Dictionary appears to be inaccurate as there is ample historical evidence that the cross was in common use in Jesus day as a form of punishment. As such stauros could linguistically mean either cross or stake at the time of Jesus death.
The words staurous and xulon are used in the bible to refer to the item of Jesus impalement, and both words have multiple meanings. According to Strong’s concordance (referred to regularly by the Watchtower) the word stauros can mean;
“(4716) stauros stow-ros' from the base of 2476; a stake or post (as set upright), i.e. (specially), a pole or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively, exposure to death, i.e. self-denial; by implication, the atonement of Christ:--cross.
(4717) stauroo stow-ro'-o from 4716; to impale on the cross; figuratively, to extinguish (subdue) passion or selfishness:--crucify.”
The Watchtower uses this definition and then claims it meant stake rather than cross in the first century, however has little evidence to back up such a claim. Reasoning From the Scriptures, 1987, p. 89 claims stauros came to mean stauros ‘later’, but gives no evidence as to when later actually was.
"In classical Greek, this word [stauros] meant merely an upright stake, or pale. Later it also came to be used for an execution stake having a crosspiece."
The second linguistic argument used is that the Greek word xulon used at Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29; Galatians 3:13 and 1 Peter 2:24 mean wood or tree.
Awake 1963 April 8 p.28 "Arguing in favor of this having been a simple stake or pole is the fact that both the apostle Paul and the apostle Peter speak of Jesus' having been put on a xylon, which simply means a piece of wood….
This argument is faulty for the same reason as the Watchtower's reasoning regarding stauros. Xylon is being restricted to the word's meaning in its most basic or etymological sense, and denies that it has more specific meanings which vary from this "basic" sense.
Contradicting itself the Awake 1963 April 8 p.28 actually went on to say "While the word xylon generally means a piece of wood, no longer living, it is at times used in the Scriptures to refer to figurative living trees....
Xylon actually had many meanings and was also used to refer to wooden artefacts made out of more than one piece of wood. In classical and Koine Greek, it was used to refer to "benches" (Demosthenes, 1111.22; Aristophanes, Vespae, 90; Acharnenses, 25),
Regardless of its meaning, the reason xulon was used in these scriptures was not as a description of Jesus instrument of death but rather as a midrashic interpretation of Deuteronomy 21:22-23. The authors used this term to indicate they were referring to the prophetic symbolism that Deuteronomy had in regards to the death of the Messiah. Galatians 3:13-14 is referring to Deuteronomy when it says; “13 Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us, because it is written: “Accursed is every man hanged upon a stake (Xylon).” 14 The purpose was that the blessing of Abraham might come to be by means of Jesus Christ for the nations, that we might receive the promised spirit through our faith.”
The linguistic argumentation does not prove or disprove the means by which Jesus died. To determine whether Jesus died on a stake or cross one can look at history, the bible and the Ante Nicene Fathers. HistoryIn Jesus day there were many forms of impaling, with the cross being the most common form used by the Romans. The reason the cross was used was that the Romans perfected the cross as one of the most extreme forms of torture. In regards to the history of the crucifixion The JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association, March 21, 1986, Volume 255; Copyright 1986, American Medical Association states:
“...Crucifixion probably first began among the Persians. Alexander the Great introduced the practice to Egypt and Carthage, and the Romans appear to have learned of it from the Carthaginans. Although the Romans did not invent crucifixion, they perfected it as a form of torture and capital punishment that was designed to produce a slow death with maximum pain and suffering. It was one of the most disgraceful and cruel methods of execution and usually was reserved only for slaves, foreigners, revolutionaries, and the vilest of criminals.
... Only later was a true cross used; it was characterized by an upright post (stipes) and a horizontal crossbar (patibulum), and it had several variations. Although archaeological and historical evidence strongly indicates that the low Tau cross was preferred by the Romans in Palestine at the time of Christ, crucifixion practices often varied in a given geographic region and in accordance with the imagination of the executioners, and the Latin cross and other forms also may have been used.
It was customary for the condemned man to carry his own cross from the flogging post to the site of crucifixion outside the city walls. He was usually naked, unless this was prohibited by local customs. Since the weight of the entire cross was probably well over 136 kg, only the crossbar was carried. The patibulum, weighing 34 to 57 kg, was placed across the nape of the victim's neck and balanced along both shoulders. Usually, the outstretched arms then were tied to the crossbar. The processional to the site of crucifixion was led by a complete Roman military guard, headed by a centurion. One of the soldiers carried a sign (titulus) on which the condemned man's name and crime were displayed. Later, the titulus would be attached to the top of the cross. The Roman guard would not leave the victim until they were sure of his death.
Outside the city walls was permanently located the heavy upright wooden stipes, on which the patibulum would be secured. In the case of the Tau cross, this was accomplished by means of a mortise and tenon joint, with or without reinforcement by ropes. To prolong the crucifixion process, a horizontal wooden block or plank, serving as a crude seat (sedile or sedulum), often was attached midway down the stipes. Only very rarely, and probably later than the time of Christ, was an additional block (suppedaneum) employed for transfixion of the feet.”
There are many pre-Christian references that indicate the cross was being used prior to the time of Jesus. These references show that it was a common practice for the victim to carry to crossbeam, or patibulum to their execution. In the first century B.C. Dionysius of Halicarnassus described the practice of tying the patibulum across the victims back:
"A Roman citizen of no obscure station, having ordered one of his slaves to be put to death, delivered him to his fellow-slaves to be led away, and in order that his punishment might be witnessed by all, directed them to drag him through the Forum and every other conspicuous part of the city as they whipped him, and that he should go ahead of the procession which the Romans were at the time conducting in honour of the god. The men ordered to lead the slave to his punishment, having stretched out both hands and fastened them to a piece of wood (tas kheiras apoteinantes amphoteras kai xuló prosdésantes) which extended across his chest and shoulders as far as his wrists, followed him, tearing his naked body with whips" (Roman Antiquities, 7.69.1-2).
This is an explicit reference to the Roman practice of patibulum-bearingas mentioned in works written prior to Jesus time by Plautus, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Plutarch and Clodius Licinus.
At http://jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=905&letter=C Kaufmann Kohler describes crucifixion and shows this practice was used 100 years before the death of Jesus;
“The crosses used were of different shapes. Some were in the form of a T, others in that of a St. Andrew's cross, X, while others again were in four parts, +. The more common kind consisted of a stake ("palus") firmly embedded in the ground ("crucem figere") before the condemned arrived at the place of execution (Cicero, "Verr." v. 12; Josephus, "B. J." vii. 6, § 4) and a cross-beam ("patibulum"), bearing the "titulus"—the inscription naming the crime (Matt. xxvii. 37; Luke xxiii. 38; Suetonius, "Cal." 38). It was this cross-beam, not the heavy stake, which the condemned was compelled to carry to the scene of execution (Plutarch, "De Sera Num. Vind." 9; Matt. ib.; John xix. 17; See Cross). The cross was not very high, and the sentenced man could without difficulty be drawn up with ropes ("in crucem tollere, agere, dare, ferre"). His hands and feet were fastened with nails to the cross-beam and stake (Tertullian, "Adv. Judæos," 10; Seneca, "Vita Beata," 19); though it has been held that, as in Egypt, the hands and feet were merely bound with ropes (see Winer, "B. R." i. 678). The execution was always preceded by flagellation (Livy, xxxiv. 26; Josephus, "B. J." ii. 14, § 9; v. 11, § 1); and on his way to his doom, led through the most populous streets, the delinquent was exposed to insult and injury. Upon arrival at the stake, his clothes were removed, and the execution took place. Death was probably caused by starvation or exhaustion, the cramped position of the body causing fearful tortures, and ultimately gradual paralysis. Whether a foot-rest was provided is open to doubt; but usually the body was placed astride a board ("sedile"). The agony lasted at least twelve hours, in some cases as long as three days. To hasten death the legs were broken, and this was considered an act of clemency (Cicero, "Phil." xiii. 27). The body remained on the cross, food for birds of prey until it rotted, or was cast before wild beasts. Special permission to remove the body was occasionally granted. Officers (carnifex and triumviri) and soldiers were in charge. This cruel way of carrying into effect the sentence of death was introduced into Palestine by the Romans. Josephus brands the first crucifixion as an act of unusual cruelty ("Ant." xiii. 14, § 2), and as illegal. But many Jews underwent this extreme penalty (ib. xx. 6, § 2; "Vita," § 75; "B. J." ii. 12, § 6; 14, § 9; v. 11, § 1; Philo, ii. 529). During the times of unrest which preceded the rise in open rebellion against Rome (about 30-66 B.C.), "rebels" met with short shrift at the hands of the oppressor. They were crucified as traitors. The sons of Judas the Galilean were among those who suffered this fate. The details given in the New Testament accounts (Matt. xxvii. and parallels) of the crucifixion of Jesus agree on the whole with the procedure in vogue under Roman law. “
Biblical References
Several scriptural references to Jesus death indicate that he died on a cross, not a stake.
The accounts at Matthew 27:26, 31-37, Mark 15:14-26, Luke 23:26-38, and John 19:1-22 all show that Jesus was forced to follow the practice referred to above of carrying the stauron to Golgotha. As seen from Dionysius quote above it was a Roman practice for the victim to carry the crossbeam, or patibulum to site of execution. There the patibulum was affixed to an upright stake.
John 19:17 (NWT) says; " And, bearing the torture stake for himself, (bastazón hautó ton stauron), he went out to the so-called Skull Place, which is called Gol´go·tha in Hebrew ".
A further indication of whether Jesus died on a cross or a stake can be seen by a comparison of the following picture with what is stated in the bible.
Knowledge Book
Look at the number of nails in each picture. Notice in the above depiction from the Watchtower publication Knowledge that there is only one nail and it goes through the wrist and not the hands, due to it being a stake, not a cross. Compare this to what Thomas stated at John 20:25; "unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe". Jesus was crucified with two nails, one in each hand, not a single nail through the wrist. That separate nails were in each hand is made clear by the use of the word ‘nails’ not ‘nail’. This clearly suggests that Jesus had his arms separated on a cross, not together on a stake as represented in Watchtower publications.
Matthew 27:37 also supports the idea of a cross rather than a stake when it says;
"Above his head they had put the charge against him in writing: ‘THIS IS JESUS, KING OF THE JEWS’ ".
In the picture of the crucifixion the plaque is above Jesus head, whereas in the Watchtower representation it is necessarily above his hands. If Jesus were impaled on a stake it would be stated that the titilus was placed above his hands, not his head. J. H. Bernard observes that this scripture "suggests that the cross was of the shape called crux immissa, with a cross-bar for the arms, as painters have generally represented it to be" (A Critical & Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John, 1929, Vol. 2, p. 628).
Ante-Nicene Fathers
It is interesting to look at what the early Christians believed. Justin Martyr was born at the time John is said to have written the account of Jesus death. Around 50 years later he wrote of the crucified Jesus. In Second Apology, chapter VI, it talks of “… Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate.”
In the First Apology Chapter XXXV Justin’s description shows that Jesus dieing on a cross was in fulfilment of prophecies that said he would ‘spread out his hands’ and also that he would bear God’s Kingdom ‘on his shoulders’;
“There are the following predictions:--"Unto us a child is born, and unto us a young man is given, and the government shall be upon His shoulders;" which is significant of the power of the cross, for to it, when He was crucified, He applied His shoulders, as shall be more clearly made out in the ensuing discourse. And again the same prophet Isaiah, being inspired by the prophetic Spirit, said, "I have spread out my hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people, to those who walk in a way that is not good. They now ask of me judgment, and dare to draw near to God." And again in other words, through another prophet, He says, "They pierced My hands and My feet, and for My vesture they cast lots." And indeed David, the king and prophet, who uttered these things, suffered none of them; but Jesus Christ stretched forth His hands, being crucified by the Jews speaking against Him, and denying that He was the Christ.”
Further in CHAPTER LV -- SYMBOLS OF THE CROSS Justin continues; “But in no instance, not even in any of those called sons of Jupiter, did they imitate the being crucified; for it was not understood by them, all the things said of it having been put symbolically. And this, as the prophet foretold, is the greatest symbol of His power and role; as is also proved by the things which fall under our observation. For consider all the things in the world, whether without this form they could be administered or have any community. For the sea is not traversed except that trophy which is called a sail abide safe in the ship; and the earth is not ploughed without it: diggers and mechanics do not their work, except with tools which have this shape. And the human form differs from that of the irrational animals in nothing else than in its being erect and having the hands extended, and having on the face extending from the forehead what is called the nose, through which there is respiration for the living creature; and this shows no other form than that of the cross. And so it was said by the prophet, "The breath before our face is the Lord Christ." And the power of this form is shown by your own symbols on what are called "vexilla" [banners] and trophies, with which all your state possessions are made, using these as the insignia of your power and government, even though you do so unwittingly. And with this form you consecrate the images of your emperors when they die, and you name them gods by inscriptions. Since, therefore, we have urged you both by reason and by an evident form, and to the utmost of our ability, we know that now we are blameless even though you disbelieve; for our part is done and finished.”
The sails on Roman boats had crossbeams
A Roman vexilla and vexilla flag, both showing the crossbeam
Justin Martyr wrote his apologies around 155 A.D. It is certainly likely that Justin knew the accurate version of Jesus death. It also shows that it was not 300 years after Jesus death that the cross was introduced by Constantine to Christianity. The cross was already used as early as the second century. If Jesus died on a cross there is nothing wrong with truthfully depicting it as so.
Likewise Tertullian clearly identifies the use of a cross in his writings dating from between A.D. 190-220)
"You hang Christians on crosses (crucibus) and stakes (stipitibus); what idol is there but is first moulded in clay, hung on a cross and stake (cruci et stipiti)? It is on a patibulum that the body of your god is first dedicated" (Apologeticus, 12.3).
"For this same letter TAU of the Greeks, which is our T, has the appearance of the cross (crucis)" (Apologeticus, 3.23.6)
Ireneaus wrote that the implement of Jesus death had five ends: two longitudinal, two latitudinal and a fifth to support the weight of the victim (Adversus Haereses, II, 24, 4). Having both longitudinal and latitudinal ends shows Ireneaus was referring to a cross. The fifth was the sedile or sedulum, a piece of wood placed below the victims feet so that they could raise the body to relieve pressure off the chest and hence prolong the time taken to die. At http://jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=899&letter=C an article by Kaufmann Kohler on the cross gives the following references to Ante Nicene works that show the Cross was commonly used by the second century. 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, "Divinæ 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). Archaeology
In 1856 R. Garrucci discovered a caricature of the crucified Jesus on the walls of the Paedagogium, on the slopes of Palatine Hill in Rome. According to Jack Finegan, "this crude graffito shows a man's body with an ass's head, on a cross. The feet are supported on a platform and the outstretched arms fastened to the transverse bar of the cross. To the left is a smaller figure of a boy or young man in an attitude of adoration" (Light From the Ancient Past, 1959, p. 373). This graffiti is thought to date sometime between AD 161-235.
Tertullian wrote of a similar cartoon in his Apologeticus: "A new representation of our god has quite recently been publicized in this city, started by a certain criminal hired to dodge wild beasts in the arena. He displayed a picture with this inscription: 'Onokoites, the god of the Christians'. The figure had the ears of an ass, one foot was cloven, and it was dressed in a toga and carrying a book. We laughed at both the caption and the cartoon" (Apologeticus, 16.12-14).
Recent archaeological finds also show that the cross was the main means of death at the time of Jesus. Early editions (1950 and 1969) of the New World Translation had said, "The passing of time and further archaeological discoveries will be certain to prove its (the stakes) correctness. . . ." This statement does not appear in the 1984 and 1985 versions of the New World Translation, indicating that the Organisation is aware that recent excavations reveal proof for the cross, as described in the Biblical Archaeology Review of Jan./Feb. 1985.
Medical evidence
http://www.centuryone.org/crucifixion2.html states t
PaganThe Watchtower claims that the cross was not used by ‘true Christians’ and is of pagan origins.
Watchtower 1989 May 1 p.26 “The fact that the cross is of pagan origin only makes the matter worse. 14 The veneration of the cross is not Christian. It does not show love for God or Christ but mocks what they stand for. It violates God’s commandments against idolatry. It reveres a pagan symbol masquerading as Christian. (Exodus 20:4, 5; Psalm 115:4-8; 1 Corinthians 10:14) To consider a pagan symbol as sacred violates God’s command: “Do not become unevenly yoked with unbelievers. For what fellowship do righteousness and lawlessness have? . . . ‘Quit touching the unclean thing.’””
This is a pointless argument. It is true that some pagan religions use various forms of the cross, but this does not make the symbol itself wrong. Cats were worshipped as gods by the Egyptians but this is not a reason for Christians not to have a cat. Wedding rings were a pagan fertility symbol just as for Egyptians the cross was a pagan fertility symbol, yet a Jehovah’s Witness can wear a wedding ring.
What makes the argument of the cross being pagan most illogical is that a stake or pole has as great a sexual connotation as the cross and significant pagan usage. In Christian times the phallus was represented by the pole shaped Obelisk of the Egyptians and Romans and the Hindu Lingam. Sacred poles are often mentioned in the bible, such as at Exodus 34:13; “13 But their altars YOU people are to pull down, and their sacred pillars YOU are to shatter, and their sacred poles YOU are to cut down.”
The idea of Jesus dieing on a stake mimics the ancient Sumerian myth of Inanna. Inanna descended into the nether world. There she was turned into a corpse by the seven judges and “the corpse was hung from a stake” for three days and nights. After this she was resurrected by the instructions of Enki, the god of fertility. (The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell, 1973, See also Mythology A Visual Encylopedia, Jo Forty 1999) If the Watchtower Society wants to find pagan concepts in the death of Jesus they need look no further than their own teaching of a stake.
To show the lack of logic behind rejecting something on the grounds of it being used by pagans consider the symbol of the Watchtower Society. The Watchtower Society uses this as a form of identification despite its strong pagan links? Consider the following pictures;
Far from being introduced as a pagan idolatrous symbol, the cross was used as a Christian symbol to prevent pagan idolatry. In The Australian Financial Review 21/12/2005 an article entitled The Mandylion Mystery by Dan Goddard explains why no one is sure what the face of Jesus looked like. The reason a depiction of Jesus was never used was to prevent pagans idolising his image. A cross and other symbols were used in an attempt to prevent idolatry creeping into Christianity:
“But do we really know what Jesus looked like? The Bible offers scant description, even by the disciples, and for more than 300 years after his crucifixion church authorities forbade images of him to be created, fearing that pagans would use a depiction of Christ as an idol. Instead, symbols were used: a ship, the ark of salvation, or a cross and a fish …”
Conclusion
The cross is no more pagan than the stake. The cross was identified with early Christianity and it is untrue to say it was not introduced until 300 years after Christ by Constantine. The Cross may have become used by some Christians as a symbol for worship and as a form of idolatry this is wrong. That some people may misuse this symbol is not a reason to reject accurate history. It is not the symbol but rather the use of the symbol that is important. The Witnesses originally used the cross, not as a form of idolatry, but rather as an accurate historical symbol.
The thrust of Rutherford’s main preaching was strong anti-Catholicism and during his tenor as President of the Watchtower Society he tried to disassociate Jehovah’s Witnesses from as much of Christendom as possible. It would appear that Jehovah’s Witnesses have changed their teachings to a stake, not on historical and biblical evidence, but for the sake of segregation. To be concerned that the average Jehovah’s Witness may become involved in idolatry if a cross is promoted shows a lack of faith in the motives of the members. Though some Catholics may render a form of idolatry to the cross this is not done by Protestant religions. Adhering to truthfulness would dictate that Christians recognise that Jesus died on a cross as a Ransom sacrifice for the sins of mankind.
|
|
Facts about Jehovah’s Witnesses |
