The cross - Just a carpenters tool?

There is evidence to suggest the cross was a lot older than Jesus indeed
it may be the case that the cross made Jesus.

Originally posted by Thequ1ck
There is evidence to suggest the cross was a lot older than Jesus indeed
it may be the case that the cross made Jesus.

It may not be the case. 😏

Originally posted by Thequ1ck
There is evidence to suggest the cross was a lot older than Jesus indeed
it may be the case that the cross made Jesus.

there is also evidence that it wasn't even a cross but a simple stake.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there is also evidence that it wasn't even a cross but a simple stake.

Not likely. It says cross in the Holy Bible, not stake. That's right, I just remembered the Watchtower changed their indoctrination Bible by replacing "cross" with "stake" so they could be different. They should have changed their indoctrination Bible to read "abstain from blood transfusions" too. 😏

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there is also evidence that it wasn't even a cross but a simple stake.

Except that it's pretty difficult to have a crucifixion without a cross.

It was probalby neither; the Romans used to nail people up frequently so there was probalby scaffold of sorts with victims being nailed to a horozontal bar and hoisted up where their feet were then nailed.

Originally posted by divegeester
It was probalby neither; the Romans used to nail people up frequently so there was probalby scaffold of sorts with victims being nailed to a horozontal bar and hoisted up where their feet were then nailed.

Either way, I seems to me that would make a cross.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Either way, I seems to me that would make a cross.

If it is important to you.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Except that it's pretty difficult to have a crucifixion without a cross.

sigh, please go away and learn what the ancients used to crucify people, there was, what is termed the crux simplex , you may find this interesting,

http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/crosses/simplex.html

Originally posted by RJHinds
Not likely. It says cross in the Holy Bible, not stake. That's right, I just remembered the Watchtower changed their indoctrination Bible by replacing "cross" with "stake" so they could be different. They should have changed their indoctrination Bible to read "abstain from blood transfusions" too. 😏

you don't know anything, your ignorance is surpassed only by your arrogance, the
Greek term, please note that the Bible was not written in English, a rather telling fact, is
stauros and refers to an upright beam, please point out the biblical reference which
states that it had any kind of crossbeam, thank you.

http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/crosses/simplex.html

Originally posted by Suzianne
Except that it's pretty difficult to have a crucifixion without a cross.

Which is why it was probably a stakeifiction, but that doesn't sound as cool.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you don't know anything, your ignorance is surpassed only by your arrogance, the
Greek term, please note that the Bible was not written in English, a rather telling fact, is
stauros and refers to an upright beam, please point out the biblical reference which
states that it had any kind of crossbeam, thank you.

http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/crosses/simplex.html

FROM YOUR LINK:
The Bible says that Jesus was hung on a tree. Whether it was an actual rooted tree or an upright wooden post set into the ground (see Broken Cross), the common consensus is that a transverse beam (patibulum) was then added. A usual crucifixion method was to bind the condemned person's wrists to a beam and then attach that beam to a tree or stipe, thereby forming a cross (crux composita or crux acuta).

The Greeks apparently used the word 'stauros' to represent a wide range of wooden structures used for executions, but Jehovah's Witnesses and a few others interpret the word to mean Jesus was executed on a post without a patibulum.

I will stay with the common consensus until it is proved otherwise. The Holy Bible records tha Pontius pilate had a sign reading "King of the Jews" nailed on the cross over the head of Jesus. If his hands were also nailed over his head, I doubt that there would be enough room for the sign. Just my opinion. However, the important thing is that Jesus was crucified as an atonement sacrifice for all our sins.

Originally posted by RJHinds
FROM YOUR LINK:
The Bible says that Jesus was hung on a tree. Whether it was an actual rooted tree or an upright wooden post set into the ground (see Broken Cross), the common consensus is that a transverse beam (patibulum) was then added. A usual crucifixion method was to bind the condemned person's wrists to a beam and then attach that beam to a tree or s he important thing is that Jesus was crucified as an atonement sacrifice for all our sins.

yes that is correct its merely your opinion and has no Biblical basis and no the Bible
states that Pilate had a sign nailed to the torture stake, Greek: stauros, an upright pole.

The Crux Simplex or Stipe, being a simple upright post, does not have the transverse
beam found on other forms. The ancient Greek word for stake is stauros (n) and
stauroo (v). This simple post was common for crucifixions until the Phoenicians added a
cross beam.

The Crux Simplex evolved from a tree (an infelix lignum or an arbor infelix)
dedicated to the gods of the nether world. Such trees are non-fruiting, unproductive,
valueless, and therefore considered appropriate to use in crucifying criminals.

The cross is a pagan symbol, one of many adopted by apostate Christianity, FACT.

Originally posted by RJHinds
FROM YOUR LINK:
The Bible says that Jesus was hung on a tree. Whether it was an actual rooted tree or an upright wooden post set into the ground (see Broken Cross), the common consensus is that a transverse beam (patibulum) was then added. A usual crucifixion method was to bind the condemned person's wrists to a beam and then attach that beam to a tree or s ...[text shortened]... he important thing is that Jesus was crucified as an atonement sacrifice for all our sins.

However, the important thing is that Jesus was crucified as an atonement sacrifice for all our sins.

That seems to be the important thing about the story, but as I have said elsewhere, I was taught that the atonement sacrifice of Christ was for Original Sin only, not for "all our sins." This seems of greater importance than the shape of the wooden object Christ was nailed to. Do you think the free-will sins of everyone are forgiven by this sacrifice, in advance of most people even being born?

Could you and others who profess to know the NT respond on this?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes that is correct its merely your opinion and has no Biblical basis and no the Bible
states that Pilate had a sign nailed to the torture stake, Greek: stauros, an upright pole.

The Crux Simplex or Stipe, being a simple upright post, does not have the transverse
beam found on other forms. The ancient Greek word for stake is stauros (n) and
...[text shortened]... g criminals.

The cross is a pagan symbol, one of many adopted by apostate Christianity, FACT.

I repeat from your link:

The Greeks apparently used the word 'stauros' to represent a wide range of wooden structures used for executions, but Jehovah's Witnesses and a few others interpret the word to mean Jesus was executed on a post without a patibulum.

Your viewpoint is in the minority and there is no proof it is right. Logic and reason indicate it was a cross composed of a post and a patibulum.