paulGrundy:


You are wrong, the hebrew and greek word for cross could also suggest a T shaped beam, I have a whole lot of archeological, biblical and linguistic evidence to support my claim.




I repeat, paradise was never used in conjuction with the word earth. The bone of contention is not with the scriptures, but with doctrine.




But there are many pentecostals and protestants that don't do these things, why would the watchtower still be different from all of them?

What I said is that there is no Hebrew word for "cross". All we have are translations. And more translations.

The word for it suggests it could be in the shape of a "T"? What makes you think it was a T-shaped cross? It could've been transverse. As far as I'm concerned, the only reason it could be a cross would be because that was the method of crucifixion at that time, and not because in Hebrew and Greek the word suggests a T. The gospels don't all call it a cross.

Paradise. A beautiful word that tries to describe Utopia to the religious mind. The lion and the lamb shall lie together and the other creatures of the world. That's what is said that will go on on the earth and has been going on in heaven. What's established up there will eventually come down. That's why paradise, where Jesus said the malefactor would follow him to, is the same as the kingdom that will be established for a millennium. A place of peace, etc. They are not wrong in saying that paradise will be on earth. They simply forget that heaven won't end because of the millennial reign.

There are many Pentecostals, etc. Are you calling watchtower a religious body or a religious publication?

Tellemall:



What I said is that there is no Hebrew word for "cross". All we have are translations. And more translations.

The Complete Jewish Bible, a translation used by many Messianics also uses the term stake in place of the more commonly translated cross. Many have said that they do not use the word “cross” because it is a pagan symbol that was brought into the early church by Constantine. The problem with this errant teaching, is that inscriptions of crosses have been found in archaeological excavations that pre-date Constantine in early Jewish Christian tombs, both on the walls, and also written on the burial ossuaries.

Although the Greek word found in some passages of the New Testament is stauros (G4716), which can mean stake, there is another word xulon (G3586) used in such passages as Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29, and Galatians 3:13 which quotes from Deuteronomy 21:23 (H6086) which is often translated as “tree”.

Historical reports and archaeological evidence pertaining to first century execution by the Romans does not support “stake” as a valid translation. The stauros was a vertical pole that was permanently installed at the crucifixion site, and the ones being crucified were forced to carry the cross beam up the hill to the site as a form of punishment. Once they reached the site, they were nailed to the crossbeam, and then hoisted up onto the vertical pole (stauros), where their feet were then nailed.

The word for it suggests it could be in the shape of a "T"? What makes you think it was a T-shaped cross? It could've been transverse. As far as I'm concerned, the only reason it could be a cross would be because that was the method of crucifixion at that time, and not because in Hebrew and Greek the word suggests a T. The gospels don't all call it a cross

.

The details of the Gospel accounts simply note that Simon from Cyrene carried the cross of Jesus and that an inscription was hung above the cross. Further, Jesus was nailed to the cross, indicating His hands being stretched out. Dr. William Lane Craig notes:

"The description of Jesus' carrying his cross is consistent with the Roman practice of forcing victims to carry the crossbeam of the cross to the place of crucifixion. The nailing of Jesus' hands and feet to the wooden frame is suggestive. In John 21:18-19 the kind of death Peter would suffer is prefigured with the words 'you will stretch out your hands and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish to go.' The second century pagan author Artemidorus similarly refers to criminals being 'crucified high and with hands outstretched' (Oneirocritica, I. 76. 35). The outstretched hands naturally suggest a lateral extension. Artemidorus confirms this when he later says, 'the cross is made of pieces of wood and nails like a boat, whose mast is similar to a cross' (II. 53. 3)." (from: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/was-jesus-crucified-on-a-cross)

Roman crucifixion could have been carried out in a variety of ways (T shaped, lowercase t shaped, X shaped, on a stake, or even upside down). However, in the case of Jesus, the details suggest a T shaped cross with enough room above His head to place a sign of Him as "King of the Jews" in three languages.

http://www.compellingtruth.org/cross-pole-stake.html

Paradise. A beautiful word that tries to describe Utopia to the religious mind. The lion and the lamb shall lie together and the other creatures of the world. That's what is said that will go on on the earth and has been going on in heaven. What's established up there will eventually come down. That's why paradise, where Jesus said the malefactor would follow him to, is the same as the kingdom that will be established for a millennium. A place of peace, etc. They are not wrong in saying that paradise will be on earth. They simply forget that heaven won't end because of the millennial reign

.

Scriptural proof?

There are many Pentecostals, etc. Are you calling watchtower a religious body or a religious publication?

The watchtower is the rank and file who determines the policies that jehovahs witnesses abide by.

goodnews201668:




As for paradise, how can you deny what you yourself read and confirm it's in the bible? Saying it was invented by jws. When adam was created was he placed in a paradise? If so you can't stop paradise from being actualized. Hebrews 2:5 talks about the inhabitable earth to come. The scriptures supports it, stop twisting the truth.

I can't stop reading the bold , nicely written.

its interesting that the Greek Septuagint refer to the garden of Eden as PARADISE .. therefore the jew that Jesus was speaking to have no problem understanding Jesus .

paulGrundy:


The Complete Jewish Bible, a translation used by many Messianics also uses the term stake in place of the more commonly translated cross. Many have said that they do not use the word “cross” because it is a pagan symbol that was brought into the early church by Constantine. The problem with this errant teaching, is that inscriptions of crosses have been found in archaeological excavations that pre-date Constantine in early Jewish Christian tombs, both on the walls, and also written on the burial ossuaries.

Although the Greek word found in some passages of the New Testament is stauros (G4716), which can mean stake, there is another word xulon (G3586) used in such passages as Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29, and Galatians 3:13 which quotes from Deuteronomy 21:23 (H6086) which is often translated as “tree”.

Historical reports and archaeological evidence pertaining to first century execution by the Romans does not support “stake” as a valid translation. The stauros was a vertical pole that was permanently installed at the crucifixion site, and the ones being crucified were forced to carry the cross beam up the hill to the site as a form of punishment. Once they reached the site, they were nailed to the crossbeam, and then hoisted up onto the vertical pole (stauros), where their feet were then nailed.

.

The details of the Gospel accounts simply note that Simon from Cyrene carried the cross of Jesus and that an inscription was hung above the cross. Further, Jesus was nailed to the cross, indicating His hands being stretched out. Dr. William Lane Craig notes:

"The description of Jesus' carrying his cross is consistent with the Roman practice of forcing victims to carry the crossbeam of the cross to the place of crucifixion. The nailing of Jesus' hands and feet to the wooden frame is suggestive. In John 21:18-19 the kind of death Peter would suffer is prefigured with the words 'you will stretch out your hands and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish to go.' The second century pagan author Artemidorus similarly refers to criminals being 'crucified high and with hands outstretched' (Oneirocritica, I. 76. 35). The outstretched hands naturally suggest a lateral extension. Artemidorus confirms this when he later says, 'the cross is made of pieces of wood and nails like a boat, whose mast is similar to a cross' (II. 53. 3)." (from: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/was-jesus-crucified-on-a-cross)

Roman crucifixion could have been carried out in a variety of ways (T shaped, lowercase t shaped, X shaped, on a stake, or even upside down). However, in the case of Jesus, the details suggest a T shaped cross with enough room above His head to place a sign of Him as "King of the Jews" in three languages.

http://www.compellingtruth.org/cross-pole-stake.html

.

Scriptural proof?



The watchtower is the rank and file who determines the policies that jehovahs witnesses abide by.

Our understanding of this issue should be based on what the Bible says, Galatians 3:13. Acts 5:30. Acts 10:39. Clearly states that Christ was hanged on a tree. And prior to that time hanging someone on a tree or pole means that the person died a despising or criminal death.

Excerpts:The use of the cross for Christians is never mentioned in the Bible. The apostles left no record of ever using or the endorsing the use of the cross.

Jesus, likely was not even crucified on a cross, as the word normally translated as cross (stauros) in the New Testament means a stake.

Here is what Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words reports on the meaning of stauros and the adoption of crosses amongst professors of Christ (bolding in electronic source):

CROSS
stauros (σταυρός, NT:4716) denotes, primarily, "an upright pale or stake." On such malefactors were nailed for execution. Both the noun and the verb stauroo, "to fasten to a stake or pale," are originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed "cross." The shape of the latter had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3 rd cent. A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the "cross" of Christ.

As for the Chi, or X, which Constantine declared he had seen in a vision leading him to champion the Christian faith, that letter was the initial of the word "Christ" and had nothing to do with "the Cross" (for xulon, "a timber beam, a tree," as used for the stauros, see under TREE). (CROSS. Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright © 1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers.)

Clearly the idea of cross was integrated into Christianity with influx of pegans in other to make them comfortable. Promote truth for once na.

paulGrundy:


The Complete Jewish Bible, a translation used by many Messianics also uses the term stake in place of the more commonly translated cross. Many have said that they do not use the word “cross” because it is a pagan symbol that was brought into the early church by Constantine. The problem with this errant teaching, is that inscriptions of crosses have been found in archaeological excavations that pre-date Constantine in early Jewish Christian tombs, both on the walls, and also written on the burial ossuaries.

Although the Greek word found in some passages of the New Testament is stauros (G4716), which can mean stake, there is another word xulon (G3586) used in such passages as Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29, and Galatians 3:13 which quotes from Deuteronomy 21:23 (H6086) which is often translated as “tree”.

Historical reports and archaeological evidence pertaining to first century execution by the Romans does not support “stake” as a valid translation. The stauros was a vertical pole that was permanently installed at the crucifixion site, and the ones being crucified were forced to carry the cross beam up the hill to the site as a form of punishment. Once they reached the site, they were nailed to the crossbeam, and then hoisted up onto the vertical pole (stauros), where their feet were then nailed.

.

The details of the Gospel accounts simply note that Simon from Cyrene carried the cross of Jesus and that an inscription was hung above the cross. Further, Jesus was nailed to the cross, indicating His hands being stretched out. Dr. William Lane Craig notes:

"The description of Jesus' carrying his cross is consistent with the Roman practice of forcing victims to carry the crossbeam of the cross to the place of crucifixion. The nailing of Jesus' hands and feet to the wooden frame is suggestive. In John 21:18-19 the kind of death Peter would suffer is prefigured with the words 'you will stretch out your hands and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish to go.' The second century pagan author Artemidorus similarly refers to criminals being 'crucified high and with hands outstretched' (Oneirocritica, I. 76. 35). The outstretched hands naturally suggest a lateral extension. Artemidorus confirms this when he later says, 'the cross is made of pieces of wood and nails like a boat, whose mast is similar to a cross' (II. 53. 3)." (from: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/was-jesus-crucified-on-a-cross)

Roman crucifixion could have been carried out in a variety of ways (T shaped, lowercase t shaped, X shaped, on a stake, or even upside down). However, in the case of Jesus, the details suggest a T shaped cross with enough room above His head to place a sign of Him as "King of the Jews" in three languages.

http://www.compellingtruth.org/cross-pole-stake.html

.

Scriptural proof?



The watchtower is the rank and file who determines the policies that jehovahs witnesses abide by.

To get INRI written doesn't need a large space. We don't know the font Pilate used. We don't know how long the sign was, if it was written word under word or right across. There are coins with inscriptions that need no conversion to wheels before they can be read.

Your Craig quote sounds... People can carry logs of wood over their shoulders. This log was not so heavy that a flogged man couldn't carry it. As I stated earlier, crucifixion or death by nailing to wood need not have happened on a cross. But it's assumed it was on two beams because the Romans favored such treatments for criminals.

Proof? really? Ask any JW in the house.

Point is: he was nailed to wood. Nobody knows in which manner for crucifixion had various forms. And translations keep translating words to those who want to see them. The word remains "tree".

Tellemall:


To get INRI written doesn't need a large space. We don't know the font Pilate used. We don't know how long the sign was, if it was written word under word or right across. There are coins with inscriptions that need no conversion to wheels before they can be read.

Your Craig quote sounds... People can carry logs of wood over their shoulders. This log was not so heavy that a flogged man couldn't carry it. As I stated earlier, crucifixion or death by nailing to wood need not have happened on a cross. But it's assumed it was on two beams because the Romans favored such treatments for criminals.

Proof? really? Ask any JW in the house.

Point is: he was nailed to wood. Nobody knows in which manner for crucifixion had various forms. And translations keep translating words to those who want to see them. The word remains "tree".

Check this picture out

paulGrundy:


Check this picture out

Aren't all their arms stretched? Even on the poles?

Look at the number of nails in each picture. Notice in the above depiction from the Watchtower publication Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life 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 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).

paulGrundy:
Look at the number of nails in each picture. Notice in the above depiction from the Watchtower publication Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life 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 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).

Two nails could've been used in the second pic. Nobody knows the circumstances of his being nailed. In both pics, the sign still remains above his head, whether the hands come first or not.

Enough of the exegesis. What do you think? You Paul Grundy?

In fact, I'm surprised your first pic has the feet nailed separately. That's a deviation from the normal.

Tellemall:


Two nails could've been used in the second pic. Nobody knows the circumstances of his being nailed. In both pics, the sign still remains above his head, whether the hands come first or not.

Enough of the exegesis. What do you think? You Paul Grundy?

In fact, I'm surprised your first pic has the feet nailed separately. That's a deviation from the normal.

Is not about what he thinks, he obviously doesn't support the truth. It's about what the Bible says.

goodnews201668:


Is not about what he thinks, he obviously doesn't support the truth. It's about what the Bible says.

I didn't know all that stuff, until a Jehovah Witness explained it to me with his Bible. And I guess he has a point. Why not call God by his true name, Jehovah?

Tellemall:


Two nails could've been used in the second pic. Nobody knows the circumstances of his being nailed

Am glad you thought in that direction, but watchtower literature thinks otherwise with respect to the number of nails.

In both pics, the sign still remains above his head, whether the hands come first or not.

Enough of the exegesis. What do you think? You Paul Grundy?

In fact, I'm surprised your first pic has the feet nailed separately. That's a deviation from the normal.

It had to be so, because if they were nailed together, the weight of the upper body would have tear through and destroyed the feet. If the feet were placed apart and nailed, it would enable him support his weight. Archeaological findings on roman crucifixtion indicates two nails pierced to the side of the feet which still contains some attachment of little pieces of bones.

goodnews201668:


Is not about what he thinks, he obviously doesn't support the truth watchtower. It's about what the Bible jehovahs witnesses says.

Much better.

paulGrundy:


Much better.

Whatever, just accept the truth as is it in the Bible for once stop shifting the goal post.
Your obsession with the JWs though.

paulGrundy:


Am glad you thought in that direction, but watchtower literature thinks otherwise with respect to the number of nails.



It had to be so, because if they were nailed together, the weight of the upper body would have tear through and destroyed the feet. If the feet were placed apart and nailed, it would enable him support his weight. Archeaological findings on roman crucifixtion indicates two nails pierced to the side of the feet which still contains some attachment of little pieces of bones.

I read up on that particular archaeological finding. Interesting.

But I assume there must have been a better pain inflicting way of placing the feet, and that should be crossed and just under major joints, somewhere in the metatarsals. It wouldn't matter where they were nailed if their legs were broken. Perhaps they even had a little piece of wood under their feet, which their toes would only just brush when their weight was shearing through their joints. It would be reassuring but not much help?

Though I don't understand how the weight from their hands would tear through if they were nailed the way Jehovah witnesses say they were nailed. The arm spread out deal looks more likely to have nails skittering through the hand joints. You need to explore that more. I think the hands spread out, nail in the middle of the palm method you think is right is actually wrong.

I find it interesting. From the Romans to Vlad. Torture is always torturously intriguing.

The bible doesn't tell us how the apostle Peter died. The most commonly accepted Church tradition is that Peter was crucifix up side down in Rome. Tradition say's when Peter was put to death, he requested to be crucified, on a inverted cross. The reason for this request was that, because he had denied the Lord, he did not consider himself worthy to die as Jesus Had. {Matthew 26:33-35, 69-75} Again this is only a tradition, and the bible doesn't confirm or deny his story.
The bible describes Jesus was crucified on a a tree {Acts 5:30, 13:29-30, 1 Peter 2:24, Acts 10:39, Galatians 3:13} How ever some say it was a stake, but either way, His feet would have been nailed together, supporting His weight so the nails wouldn't have torn through His hands hanging.