Jehovah Witnesses, cross vs. stake?

Question

in your bible New World Translation it says:
John 20:25 "Consequently the other disciples would say to him: "we have seen the Lord!" But he said to them: "Unless i see in his hands the print of the *nails* and stick my hand into his side, i will certainly not believe"

now is that nails plural meaning that they put more than one nail into his hands?

*i am not trying to fight, you will notice that while some of you have blocked me i have not blocked you so you are welcome to answer. i am simply wondering what scriptural backing there is for the stake.

Answer 1

The Bible doesn't say how many nails were nailed into Jesus' hands. Therefore, "nails" being in the plural doesn't favor a cross over a stake, or vise versa. Jesus could have been nailed to a stake with his arms raised above his head, with two nails - one for each hand - instead of one nail through both hands.



Also, some scholars think that even one nail through each hand wouldn't have been enough to support the weight of a man. Some think multiple nails where used.



Many people offer John 20:25 as evidence against a stake. But really, it doesn't offer any evidence at all in favor of a cross, or a stake.



The best evidence are the words the Bible uses to describe what Jesus was nailed to. The Bible uses "stauros," which originally meant "stake," and "xylon," which just meant a piece of wood, or a tree. Also, the Latin versions used "crux," which originally meant "stake, pole," and not a cross.



The Bible offers no evidence that Jesus was nailed to a cross.



[edit]



I have tried searching the Internet for solid evidence that a cross was used by the Romans in crucifixions. I have searched for years. I have not found evidence that the Romans used crosses. If anyone knows of any evidence, I would like to know. I found one website that seemed pretty comprehensive in its data and was pro-cross. However, most of the evidence was dated about 100 years after Jesus' death or later. The earlier "evidence" was subject to interpretation. (For example, it was claimed that a cross was found in the archeological remains of Pompeii, which was destroyed in the first century. However, since crosses existed since the time of the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians, there is no way to prove that it was a "Christian" cross.)



It doesn't matter if Jesus died on a stake or a cross - it's a minor issue. However, biblical evidence seems to favor a stake and not a cross, since the Bible used "stauros" (which didn't mean "cross") and mentions no cross-beam.

Answer 2

Heres some information about why we believ in the stake not the cross.



THE cross is loved and respected by millions of people. The Encyclopædia Britannica calls the cross “the principal symbol of the Christian religion.” Nevertheless, true Christians do not use the cross in worship. Why not?

An important reason is that Jesus Christ did not die on a cross. The Greek word generally translated “cross” is stau‧ros′. It basically means “an upright pale or stake.” The Companion Bible points out: “[Stau‧ros′] never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle . . . There is nothing in the Greek of the [New Testament] even to imply two pieces of timber.”

In several texts, Bible writers use another word for the instrument of Jesus’ death. It is the Greek word xy′lon. (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24) This word simply means “timber” or “a stick, club, or tree.”

Explaining why a simple stake was often used for executions, the book Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung (The Cross and the Crucifixion), by Hermann Fulda, states: “Trees were not everywhere available at the places chosen for public execution. So a simple beam was sunk into the ground. On this the outlaws, with hands raised upward and often also with their feet, were bound or nailed.”

The most convincing proof of all, however, comes from God’s Word. The apostle Paul says: “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 [“a tree,” King James Version].’” (Galatians 3:13) Here Paul quotes Deuteronomy 21:22, 23, which clearly refers to a stake, not a cross. Since such a means of execution made the person “a curse,” it would not be proper for Christians to decorate their homes with images of Christ impaled.

There is no evidence that for the first 300 years after Christ’s death, those claiming to be Christians used the cross in worship. In the fourth century, however, pagan Emperor Constantine became a convert to apostate Christianity and promoted the cross as its symbol. Whatever Constantine’s motives, the cross had nothing to do with Jesus Christ. The cross is, in fact, pagan in origin. The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “The cross is found in both pre-Christian and non-Christian cultures.” Various other authorities have linked the cross with nature worship and pagan sex rites.

Why, then, was this pagan symbol promoted? Apparently, to make it easier for pagans to accept “Christianity.” Nevertheless, devotion to any pagan symbol is clearly condemned by the Bible. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18) The Scriptures also forbid all forms of idolatry. (Exodus 20:4, 5; 1 Corinthians 10:14) With very good reason, therefore, true Christians do not use the cross in worship.

Answer 3

Not a JW nor a former JW.



Watch Tower and its followers:

"Impaled on a stake"



Impaled on a stake is quite different that being nailed to a stake. "Impaled on a stake" is a grotesque, perverted, and satanic image. This in one of the things that shows that disdain and hate that the Watch Tower has for our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus Immanuel.



Young's Literal Translation

Numbers 21:8

And Jehovah saith unto Moses, 'Make for thee a burning serpent, and set it on an ensign; and it hath been, every one who is bitten and hath seen it -- he hath lived.

_______



The translation of “pole” is from the word נֵס - nec - Hebrew - Strong's H5251 in Hebrew and is translated - standard, signal pole, ensign, banner, sign, sail.

The use of “nec” here is given by the subject. Biblical Hebrew and history show that these were long poles that had a small cross bar near the top from which a banner was hung.



Each tribe and family in the tribe had a standard that was hung in such a fashion. In the wilderness where this happened with the brass serpent the Hebrews moved from camp location to camp location as an army marching. Each tribe had its place and a banner by which those that needed to stop for any number of reasons while they were on the move could see where their family and tribe were and could rejoin. The same idea was during encampment each group had an area, a ensign with banner marked their location.



The Watch Tower description of this is closer to the Caduceus or the Staff of Asclepius (and pagan) pole with serpent entwined which is as the symbol used in medicine today.

Keep in mind that the serpents around a single upright pole is symbol of Hermes god of trickery, wealth and death.

_______



The Cross is not

an ankh (Crux Ansata),

a tau (Crux Commissa),

an iona (Celtic Cross),

a swastika (Crux Gammata)

a crucifix (Cruci Fixus)

a Coptic (Coptic cross),

an X (Crux Decussata)

an upright stake (Crux Simplex)

or any other form from the imaginations of men and devils.



The upright stake on the other hand is very much a pagan symbol.

Upright stake is:

an Obelisk

and

a steeple

and

a maypole.



There is not one reason to use the idea of upright stake except to pollute and deceive.



To be "staked" in the language used during the writing of the gospel testaments was commonly understood to be crucified on a tree-like cross which was the Roman method 200 years before Jesus and long after too.



There is not a word for 'cross' in Koine Greek of the New Testament. BUT the early church teachers/fathers that wrote each other in their native tongue used the word for 'cross'.



There is a great deal of history revisionism at work calling the cross preexisting as a pagan symbol. Well meaning but undereducated scholars included. The list of cross-like symbols has been given and none are the Christian cross.

Answer 4

jehovah witnesses cross stake

Answer 5

Its not only the Jehovah's Witnesses who believe that Jesus was nailed to a pole or stake. Many Bible scholars accept this. Anyway you can still put more than 1 nail through both hands. If Jesus was hanged would we all be walking about with ropes around our necks ?

Answer 6

Certainly in view of the foregoing it cannot honestly be stated that Christ without doubt was nailed on the traditionally shaped cross. And it is of striking interest to note that it is those authorities that lean toward the view that Christ was nailed on such a cross that admit doubt. But those who hold that Christ died on a simple stake or pole are not in doubt. Says one such: “Jesus died on a simple deathstake: In support of this there speak (a) the then customary usage of this means of execution in the Orient, (b) indirectly the history itself of Jesus’ sufferings and (c) many expressions of the early Church fathers.”—The Cross and Crucifixion, Hermann Fulda.



That Christ did not die on the traditionally shaped cross is also indicated by the testimony of the catacombs. Thus Dean Burgon, in his Letters from Rome, wrote: “I question whether a cross occurs on any Christian monument of the first four centuries.” Mons Perret, who spent fourteen years doing research in the catacombs of Rome, counted in all a total of 11,000 inscriptions among the millions of tombs. According to him, “not until the latter years of the fourth century does the sign of the cross appear.” Among the signs that do appear are the dove, a symbol of the holy spirit; the lyre, a symbol of joy; the anchor, a symbol of hope and the fish. Why the fish? Because the letters of the word “fish” in Greek are the same as the first letters of “Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior.”4

That Christ did not die on the traditionally shaped cross is also indicated by the Bible itself. It repeatedly tells of his dying on a tree, the Greek word being xylon.

Xylon simply means “timber,” and “by implication a stick, club or tree or other wooden article or substance.”5 That is why the Gospel writers all use xylon to refer to the staves or clubs that the mob carried when they came to take Jesus.

By saying that Christ died on a xylon these indicated that Christ died on a timber, a piece of wood.

Thus the apostle Paul states that Christ became a curse to those under the law by being fastened to a xylon, since “Accursed is every man hanged upon a stake [xylon].” Paul was there quoting from the law of Moses, which required that the bodies of executed criminals be fastened to a tree or stake as a warning and which meant that they were cursed by God

A like example is found relative to one of the decrees of Cyrus, which warned that anyone refusing to obey, “a timber will be pulled out of his house and he will be impaled upon it.” In the Greek Septuagint Version the term for timber here is xylon. Again, not a cross but a simple straight beam.



Some argue that Christ died on a cross because early Christians used the letter “X” as a symbol for Christ. However, the “X” used in this manner does not at all refer to the tree on which Christ died. Rather, it stands for the name “Christ,” it being the first (Greek) letter of the name “Christ,” written “X” and pronounced “ch” or “K.” Thus “X” is an abbreviation, not a symbol.4

Nor does the fact that the Epistle of Barnabas and the Gospel of Nicodemus state that Jesus died on a cross prove anything. Both of these works are recognized by all authorities as forgeries. Obviously both were written after the cross had been adopted as a symbol of Christendom.4

Answer 7

They try to rewrite and twist the Bible so that it reads Jesus was impaled on a torture stake. The words Impaled and Torture stake are not even found in the original Greek scriptures. Secondly they say the cross is Pagan so Jesus wouldn't have died on an Pagan symbol. This is of course is a stupid claim because the Romans was Pagan and they killed Jesus.



The fact is and supported by history and archelogy is that Jesus did in fact die on a cross. The so called "Torture stake" is pagan and is found in ancient Greek art. A statue called "The Greek death of Marsyas' is housed in the Louvre in Paris. It is dated from the 3rd century B.C. Compare it with the Jw cults depicition of a Torture stake.



The Greek statue: http://www.catholicapologetics.net/image…

The cults image: http://www.cephasministry.com/jw_torture…

Answer 8

G4717

σταυρόω

stauroō

stow-ro'-o

From G4716; to impale



Strong’s adds the words to the meaning of stauroo "on the cross"



In Strong's the meaning of the word is in italics,



Commentaries or words used in translation are not in italics.



The word literally means "To impale".



Thus the NWT is one of the few bibles that translate this word accurately and without bias.



----------------------



As to argue, when you repeatedly ask questions against the teaching of JW's and the bible, it becomes arguing no matter how 'nicely you try to phrase it.'



When you agree with Troll, and his half truths, what are you to expect JW's to think as to your questions?



----------------



As a carpenter I rarely place only one nail in a piece of wood, when nailing two piece of wood together.



Per building codes a 2x4 requires 2 nails minimum.



Where is it written that there were only one nail per hand?



One scholar wrote that because of the weight of a man, it would require 17 nails total.



Medical science states that a single nail in a hand would not hold a person upon a cross or a stake, since the tendons in the hand would rip out and the person would fall.



Are artist renderings of Jesus with only one nail per hand inspired?



No they are only renderings.



The number of nails prove nothing as to cross or stake.



The Greek word denotes a single piece of wood.



The same word describes not only what Jesus carried, but is the same as which he was fasten to.



The eye witnesses say 'stake' as to the total instrument of death.



You are not arguing with JW's, but with the eye witnesses.



.

Answer 9

Did Jesus die on a stake or a cross?



by Matt Slick





Jesus died on a cross, not a stake. In particular, the non-Christian cult of the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus died on a stake, not a cross.1 It really does not matter on which one Jesus died. The issue is whether or not He shed His blood for our sins.



The Greek word used in many Bibles which is translated into "cross" is the Greek word "stauros" which means, "an upright stake, esp. a pointed one, a cross."2 If a stake were used, instead of a cross, then Jesus' hands would have been placed above His head with a nail driven through His wrists. Since the wrists would most likely overlap, only one nail is needed through both wrists. However, John 20:25 says,



"The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe."



Notice the use of the word nails (plural) in reference to hands (plural). It makes far more sense to say that Jesus was crucified on a cross with outstretched hands and one nail in each hand placed above each other on a stake. That is why it says "...in his hands the print of the nails..."



Therefore, it is most logical to state that Jesus died on a cross with outstretched arms.

Answer 10

Put your left hand over your right hand, than get a friend to drive as many nails through them as he can. Than count the *nails* used . . .



Just kidding don't really do it, but hopefully you get the idea.



Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, by M’Clintock and Strong, comments: ‘Much time and trouble have been wasted in disputing as to whether three or four nails were used in fastening the Lord. Nonnus affirms that three only were used, in which he is followed by Gregory Nazianzen. The more general belief gives four nails, an opinion which is supported at much length and by curious arguments by Curtius. Others have carried the number of nails as high as fourteen.’—Volume II, page 580.



We don't know how many nails were used, nor do you, but to imply that only one nail can be put in your hands if your on a stake is ludicrous.

Answer 11

Facts:



1) Jesus was not crucified on a cross. He was impaled to a stake. (1 nail, 2 nail prints) I see you have quoted from JW translation. Your problem is with the English language. Nothing wrong the the translation of that passage.

2) Jesus is not God.

3) Jesus was not born December 25th

4) Jesus is not the Creator

5) Jesus is the firstborn of all creation





I am a Jehovah's Witness

Answer 12

Bot of Christ's hands were nailed above his head on a stauros (sp?). Which is a single pole of wood. They probably used 2 nails. Or maybe more. To hange him with. The male body us heavy. And would probably need more then one nail.

Answer 13

Jesus died on a cross, not a stake. In particular, the non-Christian cult of the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus died on a stake, not a cross.1 It really does not matter on which one Jesus died. The issue is whether or not He shed His blood for our sins.



The Greek word used in many Bibles which is translated into "cross" is the Greek word "stauros" which means, "an upright stake, esp. a pointed one, a cross."2 If a stake were used, instead of a cross, then Jesus' hands would have been placed above His head with a nail driven through His wrists. Since the wrists would most likely overlap, only one nail is needed through both wrists. However, John 20:25 says,



"The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe."



Notice the use of the word nails (plural) in reference to hands (plural). It makes far more sense to say that Jesus was crucified on a cross with outstretched hands and one nail in each hand placed above each other on a stake. That is why it says "...in his hands the print of the nails..."



Therefore, it is most logical to state that Jesus died on a cross with outstretched arms.

Answer 14

Peter refered to it as a tree

Answer 15

He carried the cross beam and was hung on a stake. It made the cross.

Answer 16

Greetings,



Some have tried to use the plural "nails" in Jn 20:25 as evidence that Jesus was hung on a cross is to force their own presupposition onto the text. Yet to do this they must completely ignore all logical alternatives and more importantly they must ignore the explicit statements of Scripture.



First, the Bible explicitly states that Jesus was hung on a STAUROS or XYLON. According to Greek dictionaries these words ALWAYS denote a stake or pole:



"Both words disagree with the modern idea of a cross...The stauros was simply an upright pale or stake...Stauroo never means two pieces of wood joining each other at any angle. Even the Latin word crux means a mere stake." --A Critical Lexicon, E.W.Bullinger



"There is not a single sentence in the New testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than one piece of timber. It is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as "cross"...honesty demands that we should no longer translate as "cross" a word which at the time our Gospels were written did not necessarily signify something cross-shaped. And it is equally incumbent upon us, from a moral point of view, that we should cease to render as "crucify" or "crucified" words which never bore any such meaning."



W.E.Vines Expository Dictionary says: "STAUROS....denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake. ...originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed cross...By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. the churches had either DEPARTED FROM, OR HAD TRAVESTIED, certain doctrines of the Christian faith...pagans were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols."





So, using the plural "nails" to claim that Jesus was hung on a cross would be to contradict the explicit teaching of the bible. Witnesses teach the explicit biblical statements that Jesus was hung on a "stake." Teaching that he was hung on a cross is absolutely unbiblical.



Also, Witnesses are not dogmatic about how many nails were used in the arms. Two could have been used. In fact, there is actually archeological evidence that four nails could have been used, two in the hands placed on both sides of a stake and two similarly in the feet. This was pointed out in a WT article: w87 8/15 (The archaeological evidence was of an leg bone with one nail stuck *sideways* into the ankle. Israel Exploration Journal 1985, Volume 35, pages 22-7). Historical facts show that the Romans often put individuals to death on posts having no crossbars.





Further, grammatically the plural "nails" could have meant a nail through each hand, or might have simply included both nail prints in ‘his hands and his feet.' Thomas' use of the plural “nails” does not have to be understood as a precise description indicating that each of Jesus' hands was pierced by a separate nail. In Luke 24:39 Jesus said: "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself." This suggests that Christ's feet also were nailed. Since Thomas made no mention of nail prints in Jesus' feet, his use of the plural "nail's" could have been a general reference to multiple nails used in impaling Jesus.



The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says: “The exact number of nails used . . . has been the subject of considerable speculation. In the earliest depictions of the crucifixion Jesus’ feet are shown separately nailed, but in later ones they are crossed and affixed to the upright with one nail.”



The Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, by M’Clintock and Strong, comments: “Much time and trouble have been wasted in disputing as to whether three or four nails were used in fastening the Lord. “—Volume II, page 580.



Claiming that two nails in the arms MUST mean crucifixion on a cross is to illogically force our favored interpretation while ignoring the evidence for other conclusions. This is a fallacious form of reasoning and eisogesis.



So, Thomas' statement cannot be used to show the Jesus was executed upon a cross, since it is just as reasonable to believe Christ was impaled to a stake with a separate nail in each arm.





What is the most important thing for Christians is how the Cross was introduced into Christianity. Notice again that the above quote from Vine’s Dictionary says that the cross was adopted after the church had “either DEPARTED FROM, OR HAD TRAVESTIED, certain doctrines of the Christian faith...pagans were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols."



The cross had been used in Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek and Roman paganism for centuries. It was a common emblem in sun worship. The adoption of the cross into Christianity can be traced directly to the Roman Emperor Constantine three hundred years after Christ. Constantine was not a “Christian” when he saw a vision of a cross which he adopted as his victory sign. Rather he was still a Sun-God worshiper at the head of an army of Sun-God worshipers. Although he later mandated this corrupted form of "Christianity" as the national religion, he was not converted until his death.



So the use of the cross was a not a tradition from God, but a corruption of true Christianity. This is proven by solid evidence from history and archaeology:



"The universal use of the sign of the cross makes more poignant the striking lack of crosses in early Christian remains. Most scholars now agree that the cross, as an artistic reference to the passion event, cannot be found prior to the time of Constantine."--Evidence of Church Life Before Constantine (1985), by Professor Graydon F. Snyder



Two hundred years after Christ the Christian writer Minucius Felix wrote to the pagans in Octavius and revealed the attitude that early Christians had toward the cross up to that time: "Crosses, moreover, we neither worship nor wish for. You, indeed, who consecrate gods of wood, adore wooden crosses perhaps as parts of your gods. . . . Your victorious trophies not only imitate the appearance of a simple cross, but also that of a man affixed to it." (The Ante- Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 191)



Notice, that this early church father said that Christians did not have crosses and never thought of having one. Only pagans at that time used it.



The apostate Christianity that arose several hundred years after Christ decided to adopt the pagan symbol for the god Tammuz and use it for worship in their religion. When the Bible was translated into modern languages the mistranslation of "cross" was inserted because of Roman Catholic tradition.



Should Christians venerate such a symbol as pagans have in the past? The Scriptures are clear as to what True worshipers are to do with sacred objects from false religion. Does it say: "Adopt them and change their meaning"?



2 Cor.6:14-18: "Do not link up with unbelievers and try to work with them...What business can a believer have with an unbeliever? What agreement can we have with idols? That is why the Lord has said, ‘Leave them; separate yourselves from them; DON'T TOUCH THEIR FILTHY THINGS, and I will welcome you, and you shall be my sons and daughters.'"–NLT (Cf. Deut. 12:30,31, Ex. 20:4,5, 1 Cor.10:14; Ex.20:4,5.)



God does not tolerate mixing of idolatrous practices with true worship, as is illustrated by his condemnation of calf worship, even though the Israelites said they were still worshiping the True God. (Ex 32:3-10)





BAR-ANERGES

Answer 17

ok

Answer 18

methodist...it is all the same thing....splitting hairs