Even more evidence that the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society has it wrong.
It's interesting how some heretics are trying to defend the JW's view on
this with shoddy points and are unable to refute all that has been brought
to light by the articles I have posted proving Biblically, archaeologically,
scientifically and historically that Jesus was crucified on a cross and not
a stake. It's also interesting how the heretics and cultists most often turn
to ad hominem attack and false accusations of a personal nature when they
are unable to refute the points in totality.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
Crucifixion by Cross
by Ron Rhodes
ronrhodes@earthlink.net
Jehovah's Witnesses argue that the Greek word for cross (stauros) in
clasical Greek meant "upright stake" or "pale." The Watchtower Society cites
The Imperical Bible Dictionary: 'The Greek word for cross [stauros],
properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which
anything might be hung, or which might be used in impailing [fencing in] a
piece of ground.'
Therefore, the traditionally accepted view that Christ died on a cross is
incorrect. Besides all this, the Watchtower Society says, the cross was
actually a symbol used in pre-Christian times and by non-Christian peoples.
Indeed, the cross was a symbol of the false god Tammuz in ancient Chaldea.
Thus if a person cherishes a cross, he is honoring a symbol that is opposed
to the true God.
The Jehovah's Witnesses fail to point out that the Greek word stauros was
used to refer to a variety of wooden structures used for execution in
ancient days. Robert Bowman notes that stauros as a wooden structure could
represent shapes 'similar to the Greek letter tau (T) and the plus sign (+),
occasionally using two diagonal beams (X), as well as (infrequently) a
simple upright stake with no crosspiece. To argue that only the last-named
form was used, or that stauros could be used only for that form, is
contradictory to the actual historical facts and is based on a naive
restriction of the term to its original or simplest meaning.' "
Here's an interesting verse, John 20:25, which can be found in the Jehovah's
Witnesses own interpretation of the Bible called the New World Translation.
It reads,
"Consequently the other disciples would say to him: 'We have seen the Lord!'
But he [Thomas] said to them: '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' " (emphasis added).
Now if Jesus were crucified not on a cross, but on a stake, then only one
nail would have been used for his hands. Our text, however, says that nails
were used (one for each hand). This verse is extremely problematic for the
Watchtower position - especially since their own New World Translation has
the plural form of "nails".
It is also significant that when Jesus spoke of Peter's future crucifixion,
He indicated that Peter's arms would be outstretched, not above his head.
Jesus told Peter: " 'I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed
yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old, you will stretch
out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do
not want to go.' Now Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which
Peter would glorify God" (John 21:18, 19, emphasis added).
In keeping with a cross-crucifixion instead of a stake-crucifixion, we read
in Matthew 27:37, "Above his head they placed the written charge against
him" THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS" (emphasis added). If Jesus had
died on a stake, the text would have said, "Above His hands." But it clearly
says, "Above His head", showing a cross crucifixion is meant."
.
|
