No I didn't and no it didn't. If you watched the video you'd know the evidence we have shows his hands were nailed from the sides, just like his feet, leaving a wide open space as long as you want above his head. Try thinking next time, or at least watch the video. This was the main point and it's even clear from the thumbnail. Guess you forgot...
@@CWJahTubeI wathed the film thorougly. You just said that his hands were nailed separately. 15:06 you say "I believe (...) that his hands could have been placed OVER HIS HEAD".
@magorzatak4037 Right. His hands are over his head, and pulled to the side where they are nailed just like the feet. You said there's no room for the sign over his head. Wrong.
I believe it was a cross for many reasons, but I hate when people idolise it. A few days ago, i saw a guy on twitter ask "which cross is your favourite?" With an image of a bunch of crosses... i replied "NONE What is wrong with you??" If Jesus was killed by a shotgun blow to the head, would people be asking "whats your favourite gun?" Absolutely not!
Early Christians didn't use the cross because of the trauma and because people were still getting crucified. The cross didn't become a Christian symbol until after people were no longer getting crucified. We would not worship a shot gun or rope because sadly people still die because of those things. Also Christians don't worship the cross its self but what the cross represents.
The idol is actually a mere _schematic_ of the instrument of Jesus' unaliving. The Jews call the idol the Warp and Woof. Constantine stole it from the Imperial Cult which had used it to honor Caesars at their funerals (Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 55).
Excellent research… however, one thing that’s sure is that we shouldn’t idolize or bow down to a cross made of wood, stone, metal, etc. fashioned by man’s hands. Shalom👊🏼
When reading translations-- Something to keep in mind is it wasn't the Greeks who executed Jesus it was the Romans-- so it would be (their) method of execution. History implies CROSSES were used... Greeks did not have a word for "cross" so using wooden stake or tree would be an ok substitute. Btw- (I'm an ex-Jw as well)
That really was fascinating archaeological evidence that you presented. It’s reasonable & shows us that we should not argue over whether he was hung on a stake or on a cross. I believe what matters too, is that we don’t use the devise he was hung on as an idol or a symbol of our faith. But we can often reflect on the torture he suffered on our behalf & appreciate the price he paid for our sins. Thank you for the research you did & the clear presentation of it.
the idea with crucifixion was to exhaust and suffocate the person. you have the feet and hands right. what would happen was that the weight of the body would pull on the arms and make it hard or impossible to breathe. then the victim would use the legs to take the weight off so they could breathe but that wouldnt last long as the pain and exhaustion made them let go and let gravity do its thing again. this torture went on until death. depending on the shape of the person, it could last for days. having the arms outstretched on a cross member would have taken this part of the torture away. he was nailed to an upright pole. not only that, wood was precious so a cross member was a waste. the cross is a pagan shape that got used early on in the church. the church eventually became the antichrist we see today and the cross of today is just another ungodly symbol obscuring the truth. the mark of the beast is chi (the letter X) Xi (contains an X) and stigma - an obsolete word used for six that meant a mark incised or punched, usually in the form of a cross. XXX. or ttt. the triple cross on all those churches out there is the mark of the beast. be warned and be well.
Records from the 6th decade after Jesus crucifixion in the 60s state that Peter wanted to die on an inverted cross and St Andrew wanted to die on a diagonal cross because neither one felt worthy to die on an upright cross as Jesus had. Cross...not stake. An inverted stake of Peter would be the same as upright and and a sideways stake for Andrew would be laying on the ground.
Jesus in John 8 said he would be lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness. That's an upright pole. Later stories about Peter and others do not change Jesus' traching.
CW , you are wrong, it was a Cross, my reason, The stake was quite long , Jesus hang so high that they had to give Him Vinegar/ wine on a spear . Jesus already weakened, were lashed 39 times, woman wiped up blood . He had to carry His Staurus up the hill . No single healthy man could do it. If the stake circumference were to narrow, The nails would split the wood, If thick enough , Jesus would never been able to pick up the stake. But He could carry the horizontal piece, much lighter, thats my take. But yes, I dont really mind. The word in the early translations, indicated a t , Cross. See what translators claim on this.
I wouldn't say he wad wrong. There evidence in the Bible that this is actually how they executed people. Ezra 6:11 and though it's many years before Jesus. It does prove that that's the way some were executed. And take your arms and spread them out like you were on a cross. Then take your arms and put them above your head like they were nailed together and see which one is more painful. I promise it the one above your head. You have to remember that the Catholics and the Holy Roman empire screwed up and lied about A LOT of the history of Jesus' times. They have a statue at the Vatican that's supposed to represent Peter, but in fact it's a statue of Apollo the Sun God. The statue has a disk of the sun right above his head they just renamed it and said it was Peter. And there's another one of Mary holding the baby Jesus but it's actually a statue of the Goddess ISIS. And remember, most churches today are all derived from the Catholic churches. Baptist churches say yeah we agree with the trinity that you people believe in but we don't pray to saints, and the southern Baptist are a split from them, and the Lutherans, Protestant, Evangelist, are all a split from them too. The all follow the Catholic church just a different variation of them. And I wouldn't trust anything that the Catholics leaders say or do.
Wow..interesting. your perspective makes sense. How could he carry a stake so big that when erected he had to be given a sip of vinegar with an extension (spear)...hmmm..interesting.
@@jessekings7828 he didn't carry it all the way Jesse, Simon of Cyrene helped Jesus carry his stake and the stake would've been the same height and length as a cross would have been, what that other guy said didn't make sense at all. Here's what does make sense. They didn't have an abundance of trees in Jerusalem back then because all their trees were imported from Tyre and other surrounding areas which isn't much. Trees were a highly prized thing back then and to cut up 3 of them to put Jesus and the 2 criminals on would've been a waste. They were condemned men and they wouldn't have used up a highly prized commodity for criminals. A single stake would've sufficed.
You are literally blowing your own argument out the window with your reasoning. It would be even more impossible for any person to carry such a big cross that he had to be given that sip on a spear.
a telephone pole has a cross piece for the wires. do you call it a telephone cross or a telephone pole? Jesus just has to reference the cross piece. the cross didn't originate with the Roman's. a stake or tree was used earlier in bible times. this all really doesn't matter. he was unjustly executed for declaring that he was God's son.
The word starous is not really indicative of stake only. The word cross didn’t exist in the Greek language. We do know the Romans used a starous with an additional crossbeam in execution, so the word could mean either. From here, one can theorize on the length of execution and how each affects the body biologically, the weight of the stake itself versus the weight of the crossbeam itself. What are the earliest writings referencing Christs death outside of the Gospel? How do they describe it? I personally believe it was the cross but also don’t emphasize the instrument as foundational truth. The death and resurrection is the foundation.
This is a great video. I’ve read a lot of the other comments. I agree that it’s important to determine the method in which Christ was executed, because it blasphemes when a cult or other religious groups depict him on a torture stake . True, it is important that the focus is why he died so that we can be reconciled or justified to God through his death, burial and resurrection, the cross is part of worship not because the cross itself is worshiped, but just as David says: Psalm 138 1 Psalm 138 Of David. I will praise you, O LORD, with all my heart; before the "gods" I will sing your praise. I will bow down toward your holy temple and will praise your name for your love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things your name and your word. So too, do most Christians bow down toward the cross worshiping what it represents: Christ, crucified for the forgiveness of sins. So I am glad this video was made, because I do believe knowing that Jesus Christ had to endure the cross so we could be redeemed through the blood and water that was poured out for the forgiveness of sins, is of utmost importance!There is also another scripture that states that the two criminals were placed one at the left hand, and one of the right hand of Christ, showing his hands stretched out Luke 23:32-33 in the interlinear Greek to English New Testament Bible. I agree that the most important thing is the prayer that Jesus said to the Father and John, 17 :3 this means a Everlasting life, that they might know the only true God, and the one He sent forth , Jesus Christ.
LOL I knew it! That is Greg Stafford. I saw your debate with James White. I said this guys voice is very familiar. I hope you are doing well Greg and have a proper clean wholesome relationship with our I Am. I do not know where you are at in your life right now, I only know I believe your heart is in the right place. Time is short and all of these debates are soon to be settled. I find your logic based on the evidence to be sound. The only argument for only using only two nails in total would be because they did not have many nails and were trying to conserve the nails. Yet from the evidence we can clearly see that is not the case with the feet and lends to the reasonable possibility the case was the same with the hands.
Well the Catholic Church, from which evolved all Christianity, got their cross from the Imperial Cult (Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 55) during the reign of Constantine. The earlier church did not otherwise know of this cross. The Antenicene Fathers knew of a five-pointed cross or torture-stake, one well-known point of which served as a projecting or excessive seat (Tertullian, Ad Nationes 1.12.3-4), a support for the one who is affixed with nails (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.24.4), a horn that the crucified 'rode' (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 91.1-2), and a central pale that was mounted at the mid-point of the main upright stake (Tertullian, An Answer to the Jews 10.7-8 & Against Marcion 3.18.3-4). The non-Christian writers were even more explicit! Seneca called the torture-stake a piercing cross (Moral Epistles 101.10-14), Virgil likened its projecting seat to the erect male member of Priapus (Catalepton 2a.18, found in the Priapeia 83 or 87), Lucian called the whole assembly an evil device upon which tyrants impaled men (In the Court of the Vowels). Graffiti in Pompeii and Puteoli explicitly showed the nature of crucifixion (Pozzuoli Graffito & Vivat Crux Graffito), one was just the message IN CRVCE FIGARUS _(in cruce figaris),_ meaning "Go crucify yourself", "Va te faire crucifier" (Go make yourself to crucify - "Va te faire foutre" means to go frack yourself) in French, and "Läss durch an kreuz schlagen" (may you beat to the cross) in German. There's a gnostic depiction of Christ's crucifixion known as the Bloodstone Gem at the British Museum that matches Justin Martyr's description of the fixation of a lamb just prior to its being roasted for Passover (Dialogue with Trypho 40.1-3). Whether Jesus was historically crucified in such a manner is anyone's guess because official Roman policy at the time was to treat the Jews in accordance with Jewish Law, which apparently would mandate that the seat of the cross/torture stake be a horizontal beam or dowel that passed between the legs instead (Lev. 18:22), yet Pilate was known by Philo and Josephus for his endless savage ferocity, brutality, and disrespect for Jewish Law.
In the category of things we just don’t know . Therefore it probably isn’t all that important from God’s perspective for us to know. Unless, unless, God actually had the correct words used to describe in scripture the exact form of the device used . In that case Stauros ( Stake ) is literal and should be taken literally. So, either believe the literal word used : Stake . Because God’s word is Truth or continue to speculate when it isn’t all that important. From my perspective, it was a straight pole or stake and nothing more. The use of multiple nails is actually probably completely necessary : one per hand ,when securing the victim to a single stake simply because one nail through both hands in an overhead position could be pulled out . Therefore from my perspective 4 nails were used , one per limb , upon a stake.
If stauros in the times of Jesus meant just a stake, as it did in the times of Homer -can someone tell me what word would Greeks at the times of Jesus have used for an actual cross? Certainly not crux, which is Latin and not Greek. Which word then?
That leaves the matter of the sign Pilate had affixed to the execution implement. Mark 15:26 & John 19:19 are ambivalent about it's placement. Luke 23::38 says it was above him. Matthew 27:37 says it was set above his head, no reference to it being above his hands. John 19:20 says that the sign fixed to the cross/stake said "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews" and was written in three languages. Presumably this was in letters big enough to be read by anyone attending the execution, and succeeded in offending the Jewish priests, so it's no small handbill. If Jesus was suspended on a stake did that mean the sign was somehow inserted between his head and inside his over-stretched arms and hands? Or, if his hands were stretched above his head and nailed to either side of the stake, did it obscure them?
The sign would fit above his head just like it would fit between his feet, since the feet and hands are on the side of the pole. The sign would go right above his head where there is no obstruction.
No argument that the New Testament, originally written in Greek, the "common" language of the day as English is today, used the word stauros. However, it never ceases to amaze me how in depth intellectual scholars will go to prove a point when the answer to the stauros vs cruce debate is so simple. Who executed Jesus? Not the Jews (He would have been stoned), not the Greeks/Grecians (He would have been affixed to a post), no, but by Romans on the Roman implement of execution, the cruce/crux (a Latin word from which the English word cross is derived). Thus, the question should be, did the Romans execute on a stake or a cross? I'll let the intellectual scholars ponder that. My "proof" lies in the Bible itself. Look at where the Jews "struck" the blood of a lamb for the first Passover (Exodus 12), on the two side posts and the upper door post (lintel). Draw a line between the side post splashes then another from the lintel splash to the ground. What shape is depicted? A cross. Likewise, consider the layout of the tabernacle built by Moses as blueprinted by God (Exodus 40). Again draw a line from the Ark/Mercy Seat to the altar of burnt offering and a second line from the Table of Shewbread to the Candlestick. What shape is depicted? A cross. The entire Old testament bespeaks Jesus on the cross, followed by His Resurrection!
Thanks. But none of the OT examples you gave are said to have anything to do with how Jesus died. On the other hand... Jesus himself said he would be lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness in John 8. Crosses make no sense for serpents, and even less for an UNPLANNED, last minute execution. Either way, he was also put on a "tree," the Greek word for which means a straight wood club in the very gospels which teach about Jesus being killed. So I'll go with Jesus and what he said about how he was lifted up (like a serpent) and with how XYLON ("club," "tree") is used in the gospels over your unproven OT connections.
Great information! I always ask myself who cares how he was killed....He was sacrificed according to scripture so why does it matter the HOW??? He was sacrificed period! Thanks for the information I appreciate all the information and research.
Seeking the truth in every place you can find it helps paint a clearer picture to a person who wants to avoid being taught something that is not true. That is how I look at it. In practice though it would be a silly thing to argue with someone about. Two people though being able to have a reasonable calm discussion about a very small thing such as this though would certainly demonstrate their maturity.
I know you are reading to much into it. Can't not base your assumptions upon what happen to others; specially one sample only. But I would like to answer me a simple question. Let's say you have an assembly line making ACME brackets. Lets make these simple; you can only afford three machines. But each machine can only perform a single section for the bracket. So you need to use the first machine, then the second machine and the third machine. Logically you would arraign in the proper order for the most efficiency. Know this machines are bulky and heavy needing some space in between them. Placing them as close as you could. Now you could use them in any order. The bracket would allow any order for them to be made. The question is; while they are as close as possible, in which order would you pick? Know space them apart; let's say a body in length between them, would you change the order of usage? Now double or triple it,; would this change your order? My bet would be the first one; been pretty close, that you might swap the other at your wimp. But as they get further apart you'll fallow the order in which they are set at. Wouldn't you agree?
@CW JahTube actually the typical Roman execution stake not only was cruciform but also had a penetrative 'seat' meant to secure the one who is nailed up. For more detail, please read my reply to Travis-2313 where he expressed distrust of the Vatican and the cross.
Do you have any physical evidence for your position from the first century CE? If not, it makes no difference for this discussion, and you have no basis upon which to say what was the "typical Roman execution" in the first century contrary to what the only physical evidence we have shows. The physical evidence we have shows the feet were nailed from the sides, not from the front, as is wrongly shown for Jesus. It also shows the hands could have been similarly nailed from the sides and so why Thomas said "nails," which argues against the form of a cross, which is inconsistent with the use of XYLOS in the very context of Jesus' execution for a straight "club." XLYOS is never used of a cross in the NT.
John 19:31 how do you believe the breaking of legs would differ from a stake vs a cross to locigally speed up death? or is this fact not applicable or helpful in determaining the form of wood?
if their legs were nailed on the side, it makes sense that they may have been slighty bent causing the convict to push his weight upright using his leg muscles in order to relieve stress on the diaphragm which I believe would cause extreme exhaustion not allowing the victim to breath , henceforth breaking of legs would cause a quick demise... I believe overhead hand position is more plausible anatomically and logically to produce this result. Again just a thought.
If the feet of Jesus can be nailed with two separate nails on one stake, then similarly, the two hands can be nailed using two different nails on a stake
They can tell by the angle of the dried blood on Jesus' arms that what is a "Y" position when he was crucified. If it was executed with his hands directly over his head then the blood would run straight down his arms. Pretty easy of anyone at least halfway intelligent to understand.
@@CWJahTube As shown on his image on the Shroud of Turin, when he was on the cross in the 'Y" position, the blood ran down is arms at an angle. When he died and was taken off the cross and covered with the Shroud, where the Shroud touched his arms proves that his hands were not straight over his head when he was staked to the wood.
@beverlyhurd8556 You haven't proven the Shroud is authentic. Besides, as I discuss in this video, his hands would have been nailed to sides of the pole, like the feet, not directly above his head, which would cause the very Y pattern you describe.
@@CWJahTube As millions of intelligent people know, it was *proven* by many dozens of doctors, scientists, archeologists, and other highly trained researchers and their _tens of thousands of hours_ of examination that the Shroud *most definitely* wrapped the body of a severely beaten, scourged and crucified man that was wearing a crown or cap of thorns before he died. Are you really silly enough to believe that this was someone _other_ than our Lord Jesus? No one on the planet Earth can say with 100% certainty that the Shroud once wrapped the body of Christ, but it sure is obvious to quite a few million of us that it's the Real Thing. And if you want to be in the extreme minority that actually believes that he was nailed to a stick, fine by me. Believe whatever you wish in that regard.
Although im not a Jehovahs witness, there is no doubt in my mind that have it right. Have they always had it right? NO but as the Bible says, the light gets brighter
Isn't it astonishing that given the thousands who must have been executed in this manner, we have only two pieces of evidence(feet only). So perhaps we should be careful about our conclusions based on such limited data. If any one wishes to read a scholarly discussion on the history and meaning of the terms involved , can I suggest Gunnar Samuelsson's 'Crucifixion In Antiquity'. You may be surprised by his findings. You may even be able to get it free online simewhere in a pdf
Are there no written descriptions of a Roman crucifixions? With an estimated tens of thousands of crucifixions during Roman rule, I'd think there was at least one decent written description. No?
Because of lack of evidence, you showed clearly how to close a complicated subject in a complex manner until new evidence comes up, then we can rejoice with the truth. For now it is neither here nor there.
The word Cross, with regards executing evil-doers, is not found in either the Hebrew or Greek scriptures, only the words, stake, tree, and beam, never a cross. Anyway Jesus wa cruelly executed by the Romans, who were the last people that would use a crosspiece for a purpose when an upright pole or tree would be adequate.!
It’s more drama though. To use a cross. But I’m sold on a cross because of the weight distribution. If both his hands were aver his head, the weight of his body would tear the hands and he would fall down
CWJahTube - If he said "nails" (plural). Then prove that there were e.g. two nails on their hands, and not e.g. 3 or 10 nails. Prove that it was shaped like "+" and not like "X" or "T" Where is this conclusive and hard evidence (but in the Bible) and not endless speculations and millions of ideas?
To be fair, only 3 other translations read nail (singular), i.e. 'nail marks', which could refer to one nail or more than one. And if helon is plural (nails)...
Does it really matter what method of of crusfiation , whether it be.a cross or stake? The bottom line is , during the time of Jesus, it was customary for the Romans to execute their opponents by nailing them on across.
That is interesting.
But you forgot that over his head there was written something- not over his hands.
So it had to be cross...
No I didn't and no it didn't. If you watched the video you'd know the evidence we have shows his hands were nailed from the sides, just like his feet, leaving a wide open space as long as you want above his head. Try thinking next time, or at least watch the video. This was the main point and it's even clear from the thumbnail. Guess you forgot...
@@CWJahTubeI wathed the film thorougly. You just said that his hands were nailed separately.
15:06 you say "I believe (...) that his hands could have been placed OVER HIS HEAD".
@magorzatak4037 Right. His hands are over his head, and pulled to the side where they are nailed just like the feet. You said there's no room for the sign over his head. Wrong.
@@CWJahTube Then the titulus would have to be between his hands or above.
@magorzatak4037 Exactly. It's directly over his head, between his pulled back hands.
I believe it was a cross for many reasons, but I hate when people idolise it. A few days ago, i saw a guy on twitter ask "which cross is your favourite?" With an image of a bunch of crosses... i replied "NONE What is wrong with you??" If Jesus was killed by a shotgun blow to the head, would people be asking "whats your favourite gun?" Absolutely not!
That's a very good analogy 👏
Early Christians didn't use the cross because of the trauma and because people were still getting crucified. The cross didn't become a Christian symbol until after people were no longer getting crucified. We would not worship a shot gun or rope because sadly people still die because of those things. Also Christians don't worship the cross its self but what the cross represents.
The idol is actually a mere _schematic_ of the instrument of Jesus' unaliving. The Jews call the idol the Warp and Woof. Constantine stole it from the Imperial Cult which had used it to honor Caesars at their funerals (Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 55).
Excellent research… however, one thing that’s sure is that we shouldn’t idolize or bow down to a cross made of wood, stone, metal, etc. fashioned by man’s hands. Shalom👊🏼
I have trouble believing it was a cross,if Jesus was killed by hanging would we wear nooses? I'm not a JW but I really would like to know the truth.
I agree,if he was hung,would we worship a noose?
I think they didn't care what they looked like as long as it did the trick,I don't think they cared.Sad to say.I wish I knew for certain.
Its simple.. take a look of a image of the bone on our hands
There is no way nail can handle our weight hanging on the cross
When reading translations-- Something to keep in mind is it wasn't the Greeks who executed Jesus it was the Romans-- so it would be (their) method of execution.
History implies CROSSES were used...
Greeks did not have a word for "cross"
so using wooden stake or tree would be an ok substitute.
Btw- (I'm an ex-Jw as well)
Me too
That really was fascinating archaeological evidence that you presented. It’s reasonable & shows us that we should not argue over whether he was hung on a stake or on a cross. I believe what matters too, is that we don’t use the devise he was hung on as an idol or a symbol of our faith. But we can often reflect on the torture he suffered on our behalf & appreciate the price he paid for our sins. Thank you for the research you did & the clear presentation of it.
I appreciate the thorough, fair and balanced presentation. Thank you for sharing this information.
the idea with crucifixion was to exhaust and suffocate the person. you have the feet and hands right. what would happen was that the weight of the body would pull on the arms and make it hard or impossible to breathe. then the victim would use the legs to take the weight off so they could breathe but that wouldnt last long as the pain and exhaustion made them let go and let gravity do its thing again. this torture went on until death. depending on the shape of the person, it could last for days. having the arms outstretched on a cross member would have taken this part of the torture away. he was nailed to an upright pole. not only that, wood was precious so a cross member was a waste. the cross is a pagan shape that got used early on in the church. the church eventually became the antichrist we see today and the cross of today is just another ungodly symbol obscuring the truth. the mark of the beast is chi (the letter X) Xi (contains an X) and stigma - an obsolete word used for six that meant a mark incised or punched, usually in the form of a cross. XXX. or ttt. the triple cross on all those churches out there is the mark of the beast. be warned and be well.
The bible states sloan on a tree.
Brilliant explanation Greg. You make us think . Thanks dear brother🙏
Records from the 6th decade after Jesus crucifixion in the 60s state that Peter wanted to die on an inverted cross and St Andrew wanted to die on a diagonal cross because neither one felt worthy to die on an upright cross as Jesus had.
Cross...not stake. An inverted stake of Peter would be the same as upright and and a sideways stake for Andrew would be laying on the ground.
There is no archaeological evidence for any of that. Just stories. This video is about archeological evidence, not stories apart from evidence.
Jesus in John 8 said he would be lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness. That's an upright pole. Later stories about Peter and others do not change Jesus' traching.
Jesus said to him: “Because you have seen me, have you believed? Happy are those who have not seen and yet believe.”
CW , you are wrong, it was a Cross, my reason, The stake was quite long , Jesus hang so high that they had to give Him Vinegar/ wine on a spear . Jesus already weakened, were lashed 39 times, woman wiped up blood . He had to carry His Staurus up the hill . No single healthy man could do it. If the stake circumference were to narrow, The nails would split the wood, If thick enough , Jesus would never been able to pick up the stake. But He could carry the horizontal piece, much lighter, thats my take. But yes, I dont really mind. The word in the early translations, indicated a t , Cross. See what translators claim on this.
I wouldn't say he wad wrong. There evidence in the Bible that this is actually how they executed people. Ezra 6:11 and though it's many years before Jesus. It does prove that that's the way some were executed. And take your arms and spread them out like you were on a cross. Then take your arms and put them above your head like they were nailed together and see which one is more painful. I promise it the one above your head. You have to remember that the Catholics and the Holy Roman empire screwed up and lied about A LOT of the history of Jesus' times. They have a statue at the Vatican that's supposed to represent Peter, but in fact it's a statue of Apollo the Sun God. The statue has a disk of the sun right above his head they just renamed it and said it was Peter. And there's another one of Mary holding the baby Jesus but it's actually a statue of the Goddess ISIS. And remember, most churches today are all derived from the Catholic churches. Baptist churches say yeah we agree with the trinity that you people believe in but we don't pray to saints, and the southern Baptist are a split from them, and the Lutherans, Protestant, Evangelist, are all a split from them too. The all follow the Catholic church just a different variation of them. And I wouldn't trust anything that the Catholics leaders say or do.
Wow..interesting. your perspective makes sense. How could he carry a stake so big that when erected he had to be given a sip of vinegar with an extension (spear)...hmmm..interesting.
@@jessekings7828 he didn't carry it all the way Jesse, Simon of Cyrene helped Jesus carry his stake and the stake would've been the same height and length as a cross would have been, what that other guy said didn't make sense at all. Here's what does make sense. They didn't have an abundance of trees in Jerusalem back then because all their trees were imported from Tyre and other surrounding areas which isn't much. Trees were a highly prized thing back then and to cut up 3 of them to put Jesus and the 2 criminals on would've been a waste. They were condemned men and they wouldn't have used up a highly prized commodity for criminals. A single stake would've sufficed.
You are literally blowing your own argument out the window with your reasoning. It would be even more impossible for any person to carry such a big cross that he had to be given that sip on a spear.
a telephone pole has a cross piece for the wires. do you call it a telephone cross or a telephone pole? Jesus just has to reference the cross piece. the cross didn't originate with the Roman's. a stake or tree was used earlier in bible times. this all really doesn't matter. he was unjustly executed for declaring that he was God's son.
The word starous is not really indicative of stake only. The word cross didn’t exist in the Greek language. We do know the Romans used a starous with an additional crossbeam in execution, so the word could mean either. From here, one can theorize on the length of execution and how each affects the body biologically, the weight of the stake itself versus the weight of the crossbeam itself. What are the earliest writings referencing Christs death outside of the Gospel? How do they describe it? I personally believe it was the cross but also don’t emphasize the instrument as foundational truth. The death and resurrection is the foundation.
This is a great video. I’ve read a lot of the other comments. I agree that it’s important to determine the method in which Christ was executed, because it blasphemes when a cult or other religious groups depict him on a torture stake . True, it is important that the focus is why he died so that we can be reconciled or justified to God through his death, burial and resurrection, the cross is part of worship not because the cross itself is worshiped, but just as David says: Psalm 138 1
Psalm 138 Of David. I will praise you, O LORD, with all my heart; before the "gods" I will sing your praise. I will bow down toward your holy temple and will praise your name for your love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things your name and your word.
So too, do most Christians bow down toward the cross worshiping what it represents: Christ, crucified for the forgiveness of sins. So I am glad this video was made, because I do believe knowing that Jesus Christ had to endure the cross so we could be redeemed through the blood and water that was poured out for the forgiveness of sins, is of utmost importance!There is also another scripture that states that the two criminals were placed one at the left hand, and one of the right hand of Christ, showing his hands stretched out Luke 23:32-33 in the interlinear Greek to English New Testament Bible. I agree that the most important thing is the prayer that Jesus said to the Father and John, 17 :3 this means a Everlasting life, that they might know the only true God, and the one He sent forth , Jesus Christ.
You read my mind i was actually gonna ask of your point of view on this exact topic thanks for the information
LOL I knew it! That is Greg Stafford. I saw your debate with James White. I said this guys voice is very familiar. I hope you are doing well Greg and have a proper clean wholesome relationship with our I Am. I do not know where you are at in your life right now, I only know I believe your heart is in the right place. Time is short and all of these debates are soon to be settled. I find your logic based on the evidence to be sound. The only argument for only using only two nails in total would be because they did not have many nails and were trying to conserve the nails. Yet from the evidence we can clearly see that is not the case with the feet and lends to the reasonable possibility the case was the same with the hands.
I pray to Jehovah that’s all that matters through Jesus Christ like the Bible says to do
I’m very distrustful of The Vatican, so the fact that they push the Cross, makes me lean more towards a Stake/Tree.
Well the Catholic Church, from which evolved all Christianity, got their cross from the Imperial Cult (Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 55) during the reign of Constantine. The earlier church did not otherwise know of this cross.
The Antenicene Fathers knew of a five-pointed cross or torture-stake, one well-known point of which served as a projecting or excessive seat (Tertullian, Ad Nationes 1.12.3-4), a support for the one who is affixed with nails (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.24.4), a horn that the crucified 'rode' (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 91.1-2), and a central pale that was mounted at the mid-point of the main upright stake (Tertullian, An Answer to the Jews 10.7-8 & Against Marcion 3.18.3-4).
The non-Christian writers were even more explicit! Seneca called the torture-stake a piercing cross (Moral Epistles 101.10-14), Virgil likened its projecting seat to the erect male member of Priapus (Catalepton 2a.18, found in the Priapeia 83 or 87), Lucian called the whole assembly an evil device upon which tyrants impaled men (In the Court of the Vowels).
Graffiti in Pompeii and Puteoli explicitly showed the nature of crucifixion (Pozzuoli Graffito & Vivat Crux Graffito), one was just the message IN CRVCE FIGARUS _(in cruce figaris),_ meaning "Go crucify yourself", "Va te faire crucifier" (Go make yourself to crucify - "Va te faire foutre" means to go frack yourself) in French, and "Läss durch an kreuz schlagen" (may you beat to the cross) in German.
There's a gnostic depiction of Christ's crucifixion known as the Bloodstone Gem at the British Museum that matches Justin Martyr's description of the fixation of a lamb just prior to its being roasted for Passover (Dialogue with Trypho 40.1-3).
Whether Jesus was historically crucified in such a manner is anyone's guess because official Roman policy at the time was to treat the Jews in accordance with Jewish Law, which apparently would mandate that the seat of the cross/torture stake be a horizontal beam or dowel that passed between the legs instead (Lev. 18:22), yet Pilate was known by Philo and Josephus for his endless savage ferocity, brutality, and disrespect for Jewish Law.
In the category of things we just don’t know . Therefore it probably isn’t all that important from God’s perspective for us to know. Unless, unless, God actually had the correct words used to describe in scripture the exact form of the device used . In that case Stauros ( Stake ) is literal and should be taken literally. So, either believe the literal word used : Stake . Because God’s word is Truth or continue to speculate when it isn’t all that important.
From my perspective, it was a straight pole or stake and nothing more. The use of multiple nails is actually probably completely necessary : one per hand ,when securing the victim to a single stake simply because one nail through both hands in an overhead position could be pulled out . Therefore from my perspective 4 nails were used , one per limb , upon a stake.
Good points. This is a treasure. Thanks.
Stauros lit upright stake .
If stauros in the times of Jesus meant just a stake, as it did in the times of Homer -can someone tell me what word would Greeks at the times of Jesus have used for an actual cross? Certainly not crux, which is Latin and not Greek. Which word then?
KJV Acts 5:30 "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree"
Thank you Greg. I really enjoyed that.
Stauros and xylon, means stake ,not two pieces of wood
That leaves the matter of the sign Pilate had affixed to the execution implement.
Mark 15:26 & John 19:19 are ambivalent about it's placement.
Luke 23::38 says it was above him.
Matthew 27:37 says it was set above his head, no reference to it being above his hands.
John 19:20 says that the sign fixed to the cross/stake said "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews" and was written in three languages.
Presumably this was in letters big enough to be read by anyone attending the execution, and succeeded in offending the Jewish priests, so it's no small handbill.
If Jesus was suspended on a stake did that mean the sign was somehow inserted between his head and inside his over-stretched arms and hands? Or, if his hands were stretched above his head and nailed to either side of the stake, did it obscure them?
The sign would fit above his head just like it would fit between his feet, since the feet and hands are on the side of the pole. The sign would go right above his head where there is no obstruction.
No argument that the New Testament, originally written in Greek, the "common" language of the day as English is today, used the word stauros. However, it never ceases to amaze me how in depth intellectual scholars will go to prove a point when the answer to the stauros vs cruce debate is so simple. Who executed Jesus? Not the Jews (He would have been stoned), not the Greeks/Grecians (He would have been affixed to a post), no, but by Romans on the Roman implement of execution, the cruce/crux (a Latin word from which the English word cross is derived). Thus, the question should be, did the Romans execute on a stake or a cross? I'll let the intellectual scholars ponder that.
My "proof" lies in the Bible itself. Look at where the Jews "struck" the blood of a lamb for the first Passover (Exodus 12), on the two side posts and the upper door post (lintel). Draw a line between the side post splashes then another from the lintel splash to the ground. What shape is depicted? A cross. Likewise, consider the layout of the tabernacle built by Moses as blueprinted by God (Exodus 40). Again draw a line from the Ark/Mercy Seat to the altar of burnt offering and a second line from the Table of Shewbread to the Candlestick. What shape is depicted? A cross. The entire Old testament bespeaks Jesus on the cross, followed by His Resurrection!
Thanks. But none of the OT examples you gave are said to have anything to do with how Jesus died. On the other hand... Jesus himself said he would be lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness in John 8. Crosses make no sense for serpents, and even less for an UNPLANNED, last minute execution. Either way, he was also put on a "tree," the Greek word for which means a straight wood club in the very gospels which teach about Jesus being killed. So I'll go with Jesus and what he said about how he was lifted up (like a serpent) and with how XYLON ("club," "tree") is used in the gospels over your unproven OT connections.
Nails? Was Thomas, whilst omitting to mention ‘feet’, referring to the nails of execution? I’m confident that he was.
He was hung from a tree!
3 nails, one into hands, one in each ankle. arches of foot over each other then ankles are toe nailed to pole knees bound?
Great information! I always ask myself who cares how he was killed....He was sacrificed according to scripture so why does it matter the HOW??? He was sacrificed period! Thanks for the information I appreciate all the information and research.
You're welcome!
Some people just really like having as many FACTS as possible. Especially with subjects they are very interested in.
Seeking the truth in every place you can find it helps paint a clearer picture to a person who wants to avoid being taught something that is not true. That is how I look at it. In practice though it would be a silly thing to argue with someone about. Two people though being able to have a reasonable calm discussion about a very small thing such as this though would certainly demonstrate their maturity.
I know you are reading to much into it. Can't not base your assumptions upon what happen to others; specially one sample only.
But I would like to answer me a simple question. Let's say you have an assembly line making ACME brackets. Lets make these simple; you can only afford three machines. But each machine can only perform a single section for the bracket. So you need to use the first machine, then the second machine and the third machine. Logically you would arraign in the proper order for the most efficiency. Know this machines are bulky and heavy needing some space in between them. Placing them as close as you could. Now you could use them in any order. The bracket would allow any order for them to be made. The question is; while they are as close as possible, in which order would you pick? Know space them apart; let's say a body in length between them, would you change the order of usage? Now double or triple it,; would this change your order? My bet would be the first one; been pretty close, that you might swap the other at your wimp. But as they get further apart you'll fallow the order in which they are set at. Wouldn't you agree?
@CW JahTube actually the typical Roman execution stake not only was cruciform but also had a penetrative 'seat' meant to secure the one who is nailed up. For more detail, please read my reply to Travis-2313 where he expressed distrust of the Vatican and the cross.
Do you have any physical evidence for your position from the first century CE? If not, it makes no difference for this discussion, and you have no basis upon which to say what was the "typical Roman execution" in the first century contrary to what the only physical evidence we have shows. The physical evidence we have shows the feet were nailed from the sides, not from the front, as is wrongly shown for Jesus. It also shows the hands could have been similarly nailed from the sides and so why Thomas said "nails," which argues against the form of a cross, which is inconsistent with the use of XYLOS in the very context of Jesus' execution for a straight "club." XLYOS is never used of a cross in the NT.
Probably a stake, be less trouble. Either way the cross today is a graven image.
John 19:31 how do you believe the breaking of legs would differ from a stake vs a cross to locigally speed up death? or is this fact not applicable or helpful in determaining the form of wood?
if their legs were nailed on the side, it makes sense that they may have been slighty bent causing the convict to push his weight upright using his leg muscles in order to relieve stress on the diaphragm which I believe would cause extreme exhaustion not allowing the victim to breath , henceforth breaking of legs would cause a quick demise... I believe overhead hand position is more plausible anatomically and logically to produce this result. Again just a thought.
It doesn't appear to make a difference, since the key difference with respect to cross v. stake is the position of the hands.
@@justind9356 how can he be nailed without breaking bones? Psalm 34:20
@@unmeritedfavour48 the nails would be driven through the soft tissues between the bones.
Combination of T and stake, or of tree-cross and stake. You don't want to know how, trust me!
Do you know what kind of wood was used for the cross?
No one knows.
but to use the symbol of the cross as venerated worshipped symbol is a steeped in pagedom
Venerating or using any image as part of one's religious worship is not Christian.
If the feet of Jesus can be nailed with two separate nails on one stake, then similarly, the two hands can be nailed using two different nails on a stake
Exactly. Plus, if the hands were nailed from the side, as were the feet, that explains why the text says the sign was above his head.
They can tell by the angle of the dried blood on Jesus' arms that what is a "Y" position when he was crucified. If it was executed with his hands directly over his head then the blood would run straight down his arms. Pretty easy of anyone at least halfway intelligent to understand.
To what "angle of the dried blood" are you referring?
@@CWJahTube As shown on his image on the Shroud of Turin, when he was on the cross in the 'Y" position, the blood ran down is arms at an angle. When he died and was taken off the cross and covered with the Shroud, where the Shroud touched his arms proves that his hands were not straight over his head when he was staked to the wood.
@beverlyhurd8556 You haven't proven the Shroud is authentic. Besides, as I discuss in this video, his hands would have been nailed to sides of the pole, like the feet, not directly above his head, which would cause the very Y pattern you describe.
@@CWJahTube As millions of intelligent people know, it was *proven* by many dozens of doctors, scientists, archeologists, and other highly trained researchers and their _tens of thousands of hours_ of examination that the Shroud *most definitely* wrapped the body of a severely beaten, scourged and crucified man that was wearing a crown or cap of thorns before he died. Are you really silly enough to believe that this was someone _other_ than our Lord Jesus? No one on the planet Earth can say with 100% certainty that the Shroud once wrapped the body of Christ, but it sure is obvious to quite a few million of us that it's the Real Thing. And if you want to be in the extreme minority that actually believes that he was nailed to a stick, fine by me. Believe whatever you wish in that regard.
If Jesus died on a cylindrical substance, it will be more logical for both feet to be struck onto a curved surface.
Thank you for this👏
Although im not a Jehovahs witness, there is no doubt in my mind that have it right. Have they always had it right? NO but as the Bible says, the light gets brighter
Isn't it astonishing that given the thousands who must have been executed in this manner, we have only two pieces of evidence(feet only). So perhaps we should be careful about our conclusions based on such limited data.
If any one wishes to read a scholarly discussion on the history and meaning of the terms involved , can I suggest Gunnar Samuelsson's 'Crucifixion In Antiquity'. You may be surprised by his findings. You may even be able to get it free online simewhere in a pdf
Are there no written descriptions of a Roman crucifixions? With an estimated tens of thousands of crucifixions during Roman rule, I'd think there was at least one decent written description. No?
Yes. Discussed in this video: czcams.com/users/liveuY_fLZz42Fg?si=1SKrlbY4iMTCcnGO
He was killed on a stake
Because of lack of evidence, you showed clearly how to close a complicated subject in a complex manner until new evidence comes up, then we can rejoice with the truth.
For now it is neither here nor there.
Hopefully, it will limit the arguing and keep some on either side from overstating their case...
The word Cross, with regards executing evil-doers, is not found in either the Hebrew or Greek scriptures, only the words, stake, tree, and beam, never a cross. Anyway Jesus wa cruelly executed by the Romans, who were the last people that would use a crosspiece for a purpose when an upright pole or tree would be adequate.!
It’s more drama though. To use a cross. But I’m sold on a cross because of the weight distribution. If both his hands were aver his head, the weight of his body would tear the hands and he would fall down
Finally
Excellent presentation
Galatians 3:13 NIV a pole a singular one pole
"The Crucifix Fish Testifies" Look it up.
CWJahTube - If he said "nails" (plural). Then prove that there were e.g. two nails on their hands, and not e.g. 3 or 10 nails.
Prove that it was shaped like "+" and not like "X" or "T"
Where is this conclusive and hard evidence (but in the Bible) and not endless speculations and millions of ideas?
Jesus hands above his head 1 Tim 2:8
He was hung on a tree!
New Living Translation and others say nail singular
To be fair, only 3 other translations read nail (singular), i.e. 'nail marks', which could refer to one nail or more than one. And if helon is plural (nails)...
I can't understand how this information will bring me or others closer to Jesus. You run out of topics to talk about after 2,000 years, I suppose...
You're not the only person on the planet with different interests.
Stake
Yes.he was killed on a stake.he was not killed by the Roman law by the Jews law.
Does it really matter what method of of crusfiation , whether it be.a cross or stake? The bottom line is , during the time of Jesus, it was customary for the Romans to execute their opponents by nailing them on across.