Did Christ Die on A Cross?

[Woody]

or a stake?

[Gibs]

The definition is as follows of the cross is as follows,

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.

The idea of "cross" got in there someway, but many say it was a stake or pole.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gerr]

ESV | ‎Jn 19:6 When the chief priests and the officers saw him, they cried out, “Crucify him, crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and crucify him, for I find no guilt in him.” ‎‎ESV | ‎Jn 19:17 and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called The Place of a Skull, which in Aramaic is called Golgotha.

4716. σταυρός staurós; gen. stauroú, masc. noun from hístēmi (2476), to stand. A cross, a stake, often with a cross–piece, on which criminals were nailed for execution. The cross was an instrument of most dreadful and agonizing torture.

Zodhiates, S. (2000). The complete word study dictionary: New Testament (electronic ed.). Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers.

If our Lord died on a stake without the cross piece, it's hard for me to see how His hands and feet could have been nailed to a pole without the cross piece.

[Woody]

The entire body could have been in a vertical position. Nothing says there has to be a horizontal part to have the hands secured. His hands could have been above his head.

[Gerr]

That would have required a pretty good-sized log. Try carrying one big enough for one to be nailed vertically.

[Woody]

Depends upon how tall He was. People were born short in those days. I should have said 'wee' not short.

[jasd]

QR frame:

He was nailed to the patibulum and then hung from it on a tree.

[Gerr]

Depends upon how tall He was. People were born short in those days. I should have said 'wee' not short.

In case you didn't notice, a cross IS A STAKE "often with a cross piece" which I believe is the patibulum that Jasd speaks of. So, yes, Jesus was nailed to a cross/stake.

[Lysimachus]

I say tradition in this respect is correct.

[skyblue888]

True.

sky

[jasd]

Among the several reasons one might think that Jesus Christ was hung on a tree, is the following:

Lu 23:33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.

…meaning that Jeus Christ was in the midst of them.

Jn 19:32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.

Jn 19:33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:

About the only way that the soldiers first broke the legs of one malefactor and then the other – and then coming upon Jesus Christ…, was that they were all hung roundabouts upon a tree. Hardly makes sense that the soldiers would break the legs of the one malefactor – skip Jesus Christ by going to and breaking the legs of the other malefactor and then returning to break the legs of Jesus Christ – who was in the midst of them – as would have been the case should our view of a traditional crucifixion obtain.

Anyway, look at it this way: the Pharisees hated Jesus Christ so much that they would have passed the opportunity to hang Him upon a tree – signifying His accursedness?—nah, no such thing as a middlin’ or tempered hate held by those Pharisees…

[jasd]

Beg to differ. While Writ several times over - explicitly states that Jesus Christ was hung on a tree - contrastively, in place of the clearly stated, there exists only allusion and ambiguity where Writ ought to have stated explicitly that Jesus Christ was crucified a la Roma – or as tradition would have it – on the crossbeam and stave.

He was hung on a tree together with two thieves – one on either side of Him - roundabouts.

[John317]

I believe there's strong biblical evidence that Jesus Christ was nailed to a cross, that is, a stake with a cross-piece.

John 21: 18 indicates that Jesus' hands were "stretched out" when he died, just as Jesus told Peter that Peter's own hands would also some day be "stretched out," suffering a death similar to Christ's.

If we tell someone to "stretch out" their hands, what will they do-- stretch their hands up over their head, or stetch their hands out to the sides? I believe the latter is most reasonable.

Also, where do the Gospels say the sign was nailed? Matthew tells us that the sign was nailed "over [or above] his head" (Matt. 27: 37).

If Christ's hands were stretched up over his head, the Gospels would doubtless say that the sign was nailed above his hands.

If an artist is asked to paint a picture of a man with a sign above his head, it's doubtful that he would make a painting showing the sign above the man's hands.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Beg to differ. While Writ several times over - explicitly states that Jesus Christ was hung on a tree - contrastively, in place of the clearly stated, there exists only allusion and ambiguity where Writ ought to have stated explicitly that Jesus Christ was crucified a la Roma – or as tradition would have it – on the crossbeam and stave.

He was hung on a tree together with two thieves – one on either side of Him - roundabouts.

>>Kindly give the references; it would be appreciated ---especially the ones in the Gospels ...<<

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. (#3586: xylon)

Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: (#3586: xylon)

1 Pet 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, (#3586: xylon) that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

I provided a coupla two-three texts that are absolute declaratives – that Jesus Christ was crucified on a tree. The texts which are often proffered from the Gospels as similitudes are those which are inferrentially drawn… and lack the character of the absolute declarative.

[jasd]

>>In the Gospels the word for 'tree' is ‘dendron’.<<

Indeed, though not limited to the Gospels, for there are several texts in Revelation which utilizes dendron – speaking of which - why does not Revelation 22:2 employ dendron rather than xylon?—to wit:

Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, [was there] the tree (#3586; xylon) of life, which bare twelve [manner of] fruits, [and] yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree (#3586; xylon) [were] for the healing of the nations.

Seems to me that the Tree of Life would be the archetype of trees, yes?

>>The word 'dendron' is nowhere in the NT used for the instrument of Jesus' 'crucifixion'.<<

Indeed not; however, note Saint Luke’s use of xylon for tree:

Lu 23:31 For if they do these things in a green tree (#3586; xylon), what shall be done in the dry?

>>The Acts, Paul, Peter [and John in his Revelation for 'tree'] use the word 'ksulon' for the 'cross', in the KJV, "tree".<<

Oh?

>>The word is also rendered 'stave' or 'staff' or 'wood'.<<

One is put to mind the adage, “How many ways is Dostoevsky spelled?”

>>The better translation where 'ksulon' is used for the cross, would be 'wood' or 'pole' rather than 'tree' ---IMHO.<<

Okay, however – it is also translated ‘tree’ in Holy Writ. Moreover, the “LXX translates the Hebrew ets as xylon/tree in Genesis 1:11, 12, 29; 2:9; 3:6” (etc).” [ed.jasd]

“The Anchor Bible Dictionary says about crucifixion: "The act of nailing or binding a living victim or sometimes a dead person to a cross or stake(stauros or skolops) or a tree(xylon)...Under the Roman Empire, crucifixion normally included a flogging beforehand. At times the cross was only one vertical stake. Frequently, however, there was a cross-piece attached..."- Volume 1, pp.1207, 1208

>>Then - of course - the word in the Gospels for the 'cross', is, the "cross", 'stauros'; 'crucify', 'stauro-oh'.<<

Do you believe that Jesus Christ was made to carry the entire cross of an upright beam and a cross beam attached?

[jasd]

>>You obviously didn't read my post before yours ...<<

But I did - in my post addressed to you as #584367 - Yesterday at 09:01 AM - by the which I responded to your points raised.

[whatisthis]

Then what did Simon carry uphill for Jesus because he couldn't carry it? Is it possible the "tree" referred to, like a "coat tree" was made out of wood with cross-branching?

[whatisthis]

To me, Jesus death for us, carrying our sins, is the important thing. That he was lifted up so we could look and live makes the most gory subject a glory subject!

[jasd]

>>Then what did Simon carry uphill for Jesus because he couldn't carry it?<<

Quote:

Quote:jasd

He was nailed to the patibulum and then hung from it on a tree.

Jesus Christ and Simon carried a stauros – whose definition employs some latitude, ie: post, beam, pointed stake, etc. In Jesus Christ’s case it was likely a beam upon which He was later nailed and it in turn fastened to the tree – and thereon, He hung - cursed with mankind’s sins.

>> That he was lifted up so we could look and live makes the most gory subject a glory subject!<<

Indeed, and in telling the story – it behooves us to have a somewhat grasp of the particulars, as so many who listen nowadays are truly skeptics – so ever ready to dismiss anything Biblical.

[jasd]

Re:

http://www.biblestudents.co.za

Good site, which I found informative. Don't usually follow links; however, was curious as to why it was used somewhat as a siggie. Glad I did..., and seems that it was you who developed it. It's yours, ain it not?

How about that!?

However, wherein it does not harmonize with my own interpretations - it needs to be reworked. [/kidding] :)