Anna

Pretty rough on actors, I'd say. I guess everyone's a critic.

You do not have a truth by which you are able to define what is false in this matter.

At last we have joined the land of the civilized again! I sure hope that our "flight" may not occur in the winter time 😨
So drum roll.............
The etymology of stauros: The R. S. P. Beekes, Etymological Dictionary of Greek, Brill, 2009, says on page 601: The word stauros comes from the verb ἵστημι (histēmi: "straighten up", "stand"), which in turn comes from the Proto-Indo-European root *steh2-u- "pole",[1] related to the root *steh2- "to stand, to set"
Lucian of Samosata, (circa 125-180 AD) a satirical writer in the 2nd century mentions the word stauros with its' various forms such as: Anestavrostho, stavromenos, and stavrosi etc. which  translators have translated as “let him be crucified” “crucified” and “crucifixion” respectively.
ἀνεσταυρώσθω   (Anestavrostho - let him be crucified)
σταυρωμένος (stavromenos – crucified)
σταύρωση (stavrosi- crucifixion)
In his writing about Prometheus he apparently gives us an idea of what he thought the stauros looked like:
Hermes: This, Hephaestus, is the Caucasus, to which it is our painful duty to nail our companion. We have now to select a suitable crag, free from snow, on which the chains will have a good hold, and the prisoner will hang in all publicity.
Hephaestus: True. It will not do to fix him too low down, or these men of his might come to their maker's assistance; nor at the top, where he would be invisible from the earth. What do you say to a middle course? Let him hang over this precipice, with his arms stretched across from crag to crag.
Hermes: The very thing. Steep rocks, slightly overhanging, inaccessible on every side; no foothold but a mere ledge, with scarcely room for the tips of one's toes; altogether a sweet spot for a crucifixion. Now, Prometheus, come and be nailed up; there is no time to lose.
Prometheus: Nay, hear me; Hephaestus! Hermes! I suffer injustice: have compassion on my woes!
Hermes: In other words, disobey orders, and promptly be gibbeted in your stead! Do you suppose there is not room on the Caucasus to peg out a couple of us? Come, your right hand! clamp it down, Hephaestus, and in with the nails; bring down the hammer with a will. Now the left; make sure work of that too.--So!--The eagle will shortly be here, to trim your liver; so ingenious an artist is entitled to every attention.
This website shows the Greek version with the English translation. Unfortunately I wanted to go to the next page as well and then couldn’t go back because I had reached my limit for pages (which seems to be one (!). So don’t make the same mistake as me, unless you want to subscribe.
https://www.loebclassics.com/view/lucian-prometheus/1915/pb_LCL054.241.xml
------------------------------------------------
The Greek playwright Aeschylus (circa 525 -456 BCE) wrote (supposedly) the original play Prometheus Bound* and does not mention a stauros but that doesn’t change the idea that stauros could have been a stake with a cross beam as per Lucian’s satirical interpretation of the Prometheus mythology/legend. In one of his other writings "the death of Peregrine" he mentions the stauros with relation to Jesus: "Peregrine, all this time, was making quite an income on the strength of his bondage; money came pouring in. You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.
 
So the questions are: Where did Lucian get his idea for the shape of the stauros?
Or was it translation bias? Or tampering with the original writing? Or were people already executed on a cross beam in the 2nd Century as opposed much later (4th century)?
You might think of other questions....
 
*Prometheus Bound - Aeschylus
"But forcibly to bind a brother God, In chains, in this deep chasm raked by all storms........In bonds of brass not easy to be loosed, Nailing thee to this crag where no wight dwells"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/aesch/promet.htm
 
 

At last we have joined the land of the civilized again! I sure hope that our "flight" may not occur in the winter time 😨
So drum roll.............
The etymology of stauros: The R. S. P. Beekes, Etymological Dictionary of Greek, Brill, 2009, says on page 601: The word stauros comes from the verb ἵστημι (histēmi: "straighten up", "stand"), which in turn comes from the Proto-Indo-European root *steh2-u- "pole",[1] related to the root *steh2- "to stand, to set"
Lucian of Samosata, (circa 125-180 AD) a satirical writer in the 2nd century mentions the word stauros with its' various forms such as: Anestavrostho, stavromenos, and stavrosi etc. which  translators have translated as “let him be crucified” “crucified” and “crucifixion” respectively.
ἀνεσταυρώσθω   (Anestavrostho - let him be crucified)
σταυρωμένος (stavromenos – crucified)
σταύρωση (stavrosi- crucifixion)
In his writing about Prometheus he apparently gives us an idea of what he thought the stauros looked like:
Hermes: This, Hephaestus, is the Caucasus, to which it is our painful duty to nail our companion. We have now to select a suitable crag, free from snow, on which the chains will have a good hold, and the prisoner will hang in all publicity.
Hephaestus: True. It will not do to fix him too low down, or these men of his might come to their maker's assistance; nor at the top, where he would be invisible from the earth. What do you say to a middle course? Let him hang over this precipice, with his arms stretched across from crag to crag.
Hermes: The very thing. Steep rocks, slightly overhanging, inaccessible on every side; no foothold but a mere ledge, with scarcely room for the tips of one's toes; altogether a sweet spot for a crucifixion. Now, Prometheus, come and be nailed up; there is no time to lose.
Prometheus: Nay, hear me; Hephaestus! Hermes! I suffer injustice: have compassion on my woes!
Hermes: In other words, disobey orders, and promptly be gibbeted in your stead! Do you suppose there is not room on the Caucasus to peg out a couple of us? Come, your right hand! clamp it down, Hephaestus, and in with the nails; bring down the hammer with a will. Now the left; make sure work of that too.--So!--The eagle will shortly be here, to trim your liver; so ingenious an artist is entitled to every attention.
This website shows the Greek version with the English translation. Unfortunately I wanted to go to the next page as well and then couldn’t go back because I had reached my limit for pages (which seems to be one (!). So don’t make the same mistake as me, unless you want to subscribe.
https://www.loebclassics.com/view/lucian-prometheus/1915/pb_LCL054.241.xml
------------------------------------------------
The Greek playwright Aeschylus (circa 525 -456 BCE) wrote (supposedly) the original play Prometheus Bound* and does not mention a stauros but that doesn’t change the idea that stauros could have been a stake with a cross beam as per Lucian’s satirical interpretation of the Prometheus mythology/legend. In one of his other writings "the death of Peregrine" he mentions the stauros with relation to Jesus: "Peregrine, all this time, was making quite an income on the strength of his bondage; money came pouring in. You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.
 
So the questions are: Where did Lucian get his idea for the shape of the stauros?
Or was it translation bias? Or tampering with the original writing? Or were people already executed on a cross beam in the 2nd Century as opposed much later (4th century)?
You might think of other questions....
 
*Prometheus Bound - Aeschylus
"But forcibly to bind a brother God, In chains, in this deep chasm raked by all storms........In bonds of brass not easy to be loosed, Nailing thee to this crag where no wight dwells"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/aesch/promet.htm
 
 

Not so sure about this. First of all, it was never Sturous, but σταυρός / σταυροῦ which is transliterated as stauros, staurou, stauro, or sometimes stavros, stavrou, stavro. But why do you say "earlier versions" defined it as plank? Earlier version of Greek before Homer? And are you really implying the word "plank" as a punishment? 
Speaking of pirates and ships, however, this mainsail is the shape that some Greek / Roman writers described as the STAUROS:
One quote offered in Leolaia, p.5, is the following from about 160 C.E.:
Artemidorus Daldianus, a pagan soothsayer who flourished in the second century A.D. Sometime around A.D. 160, he wrote a dream interpretation manual named Oneiro critica. In one passage (2,53), Artemidorus remarked:
Being crucified is auspicious for all seafarers. For the σταυρος [stauros], like a ship, is made of wood and nails, and the ship's mast resembles a σταυρος.[stauros]  
 

At last we have joined the land of the civilized again! I sure hope that our "flight" may not occur in the winter time 😨
So drum roll.............
The etymology of stauros: The R. S. P. Beekes, Etymological Dictionary of Greek, Brill, 2009, says on page 601: The word stauros comes from the verb ἵστημι (histēmi: "straighten up", "stand"), which in turn comes from the Proto-Indo-European root *steh2-u- "pole",[1] related to the root *steh2- "to stand, to set"
Lucian of Samosata, (circa 125-180 AD) a satirical writer in the 2nd century mentions the word stauros with its' various forms such as: Anestavrostho, stavromenos, and stavrosi etc. which  translators have translated as “let him be crucified” “crucified” and “crucifixion” respectively.
ἀνεσταυρώσθω   (Anestavrostho - let him be crucified)
σταυρωμένος (stavromenos – crucified)
σταύρωση (stavrosi- crucifixion)
In his writing about Prometheus he apparently gives us an idea of what he thought the stauros looked like:
Hermes: This, Hephaestus, is the Caucasus, to which it is our painful duty to nail our companion. We have now to select a suitable crag, free from snow, on which the chains will have a good hold, and the prisoner will hang in all publicity.
Hephaestus: True. It will not do to fix him too low down, or these men of his might come to their maker's assistance; nor at the top, where he would be invisible from the earth. What do you say to a middle course? Let him hang over this precipice, with his arms stretched across from crag to crag.
Hermes: The very thing. Steep rocks, slightly overhanging, inaccessible on every side; no foothold but a mere ledge, with scarcely room for the tips of one's toes; altogether a sweet spot for a crucifixion. Now, Prometheus, come and be nailed up; there is no time to lose.
Prometheus: Nay, hear me; Hephaestus! Hermes! I suffer injustice: have compassion on my woes!
Hermes: In other words, disobey orders, and promptly be gibbeted in your stead! Do you suppose there is not room on the Caucasus to peg out a couple of us? Come, your right hand! clamp it down, Hephaestus, and in with the nails; bring down the hammer with a will. Now the left; make sure work of that too.--So!--The eagle will shortly be here, to trim your liver; so ingenious an artist is entitled to every attention.
This website shows the Greek version with the English translation. Unfortunately I wanted to go to the next page as well and then couldn’t go back because I had reached my limit for pages (which seems to be one (!). So don’t make the same mistake as me, unless you want to subscribe.
https://www.loebclassics.com/view/lucian-prometheus/1915/pb_LCL054.241.xml
------------------------------------------------
The Greek playwright Aeschylus (circa 525 -456 BCE) wrote (supposedly) the original play Prometheus Bound* and does not mention a stauros but that doesn’t change the idea that stauros could have been a stake with a cross beam as per Lucian’s satirical interpretation of the Prometheus mythology/legend. In one of his other writings "the death of Peregrine" he mentions the stauros with relation to Jesus: "Peregrine, all this time, was making quite an income on the strength of his bondage; money came pouring in. You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.
 
So the questions are: Where did Lucian get his idea for the shape of the stauros?
Or was it translation bias? Or tampering with the original writing? Or were people already executed on a cross beam in the 2nd Century as opposed much later (4th century)?
You might think of other questions....
 
*Prometheus Bound - Aeschylus
"But forcibly to bind a brother God, In chains, in this deep chasm raked by all storms........In bonds of brass not easy to be loosed, Nailing thee to this crag where no wight dwells"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/aesch/promet.htm
 
 

I've used this argument at the door and with Bible studies, too: that supposedly Christians, even if they claim they are not worshiping the item, should still find it wrong to carry around a model of the "murder weapon" that killed Jesus Christ! I've even heard the additional example from other Witnesses, such as: "If your own father had been murdered with an AK-47, or a .38 revolver, would you ever think about carrying around a small model of an AK-47, or a .38 revolver, on a chain around your neck?"
Of course, this seemed quite fair until I learned that a member of the Governing Body who had worn a cross in the past, remembered that it was the way in which they felt they were showing their agreement with the idea in Mark:
(Mark 8:34) . . .“If anyone wants to come after me, let him disown himself and pick up his [STAUROS] and follow me continually." It was the Bible that treated the STAUROS as a "symbol." And we would never have complained that Jesus was saying (Mark 8:34) . . .“If anyone wants to come after me, let him disown himself and pick up his [MURDER WEAPON] and follow me continually."
Similarly, the apostle Paul would have been saying:
(1 Corinthians 2:2) For I decided not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ, and [his MURDER WEAPON]. Jesus and Paul knew that the STAUROS (whether cross or stake) was a proper symbol that could remind us of Christ's sacrifice, and it would remind us of our own need for daily sacrifice, and even a similar sacrifice to the death if need be. But this is not an external symbol like baptism by which we show we have dedicated our lives to God and associate ourselves with Christians of like faith. For we walk by faith and not by sight, and need no ongoing piece of jewelry to state our Christian status.

Thanks, I needed to see that, because both the Bible teach book and its simplified replacement; The teach us book unequivocally state that Jesus did not die on a cross.
We still don't have electricity, so I am still not able to get to my stuff on the computer. The jaws theme is still rolling!!

Thanks, I needed to see that, because both the Bible teach book and its simplified replacement; The teach us book unequivocally state that Jesus did not die on a cross.
We still don't have electricity, so I am still not able to get to my stuff on the computer. The jaws theme is still rolling!!

I tried to copy the website page which only had a couple of duplicates, but a when I pasted it almost every picture was on there two or three times. I didn't bother to delete more than about 5 of them because I didn't know which picture went with which bit of text. I just deleted a few more duplicates, but still didn't bother to see if the pictures go with the property description. It's probably an automated lookup that creates the page and it grabs updated and near duplicate listings as separate listings.
I have been hearing that there have been some legal issues with the WTS sale of so many halls after they turned ownership of all US KH's over to a WTS Trust.

They are as similar to true Christians as darkness is to light. The aim of their attempt to be "successful" in their abuse of Jesus' name was to further their charlatan career. Their complicity with the demons was with or without their full knowledge of what they were doing. Many who work with the demons in their deception think they are actually controlling the activity of these creatures. All they are doing is furthering that illusion. Jesus wasn't theorising when he asked the scribes who enabled their sons to expel demons. Luke 11:19.
Neither do we deny that sewage contains water.
Absolutely. But I think we would by now have agreed fully on that? It still doesn't change the fact that the apostasy associated with the two bar cross is far greater than a crux simplex which has not become the brand mark of "Christian" apostasy.
Agreed, but we have Jehovah's spirit to enable us to discern apostasy. That is what I was driving at. Apostasy against Jehovah is Satanic in origin and is actively promoted by him. That is why it is difficult, even impossible to discern humanly. It is like carbon monoxide. We can only discern and protect our thinking from it's influence by means of God's spirit. And Jehovah will decide on how and when erroneous thinking will be corrected. He assesses the priorities and directs our action accordingly.
I think this is a mistake. The Letter of Barnabas is like a car driven over a cliff. Any shred of truth in it is not a touchstone to evaluate our understanding  today. At best, it is just a piece of untainted flesh in an otherwise rotting carcass. If the teaching is "true", it is because God's word is true. Psuedo-Barnabas may have got that bit right, we may have too. There the similarity ends.
As for the stocks/xylon thing? well it appears the wheel has already been invented on that one. The Septuagint apparently equates xylon with the Hebrew word for stocks (Job 33:11) and even the classical greek of Aristophanes gives a clue in referring to this instrument of restraint. "Sometimes it was what Aristophanes calls πεντεσύριγγον ξύλον, "stocks with five holes," two for the feet, two for the hands, and one for the neck." (Pulpit Commentary).
So somewhere a while back I indicated that my instincts lean me toward the single stake view of Jesus' executional implement. The fascinating and at times obscure detail unearthed in this discussion has not swayed my preference on this issue yet, but I recognise at the end of it all we cannot be definitive on what it was .....yet.
This whole excercise reminds me of those poor people who make a living scavenging for gold on the streets of Mumbai. They do find some, but I think we can agree there are better ways to make a living.
😊
 
 

Any mention of pillows is a sore subject with me. Many of my friends had to go naked for the sake of these.
 
Whenever the office staff thought a letter was from a birdbrain they handed it to me. I never got to do anything else. That’s why I left.

That's the beauty of interpretation. It depends on how you look at it
How I am looking at it is from the drivers point of view.  I am assuming the backseat driver is mostly useless, because he can't see properly  (it's a lot easier to be useless than useful), but he may have the odd useful remark or reminder. But when he is not even in the car, how useful can he be then. He is totally useless and it's easy for him to be that way.

Cue the Jaws theme yet again! Can't wait.  😁

Thank you Srecko for your concern. This is a very tactful and correct way to ask for a reason for something. 
I will probably be very concise and to the point. But why I really mentioned this was because you implied that not believing the claim made by the GB, that Jesus did not die on a cross, would get me in some kind of trouble, and I was saying no, it would not.

Thank you Srecko for your concern. This is a very tactful and correct way to ask for a reason for something. 
I will probably be very concise and to the point. But why I really mentioned this was because you implied that not believing the claim made by the GB, that Jesus did not die on a cross, would get me in some kind of trouble, and I was saying no, it would not.

There is something else and very interesting  I have found regarding the shape of the "cross/stauros" but I will have to wait until our power is back (Ice storm) and I can get on the computer because typing this on the phone is a pain.

This is perfectly valid. As the acount in Luke  23:39 was written by a physician, it would be curious that he would intentionally confuse matters anatomically if the specific word for "wrist"  in Greek (karpos) was in common usage. After all, he was quite specific regarding the healing of the lame man a few weeks later, when he described this at Acts 3:7, using the terms "feet" and "ankles". But, he didn't use the word "palm" which was in common use (Mark 14:65) to desribe the nail positions. It has been theorized that Luke was sticking more to  the account as relayed to him, not being an eye-witness, and if karpos was not in general use particularly among Galileans of the time, then his use of the word for "hand" which. in the parlance of the day included the "wrist", (wheras "palm" did not) is quite acceptable. However, this no argument to definitely ascertain the positioning of the nail (s).
With regard to the notion of the palm's inability to support the weight of the body, this appears to be based on the suspect experiments carried out by Pierre Barbet (1884–1961), subsequently challenged rather thoroughly, if bizarrely, by Frederick Zugibe (1928-2002. Notwithstanding the Shroud of Turin theories being the object of attention, his conclusions are considerably relevant.
Altering illustrations to show Jesus nailed through the wrists is quite a generous step to take, given the weight of academic opinion however, and for the Governing Body to take this step shows a perfectly reasonable approach in view of the lack of concrete information -  concession without compromise.
Jesus words (recorded again by physician Luke) at Luke 24:39-40 may well give us a clue to a more complete account of  his response to the doubts of Thomas, the details of which may have only been partially reported by John (John 20:25). The reference of Jesus to hands and feet as an evidence of his being the one resurrected  would necessitate the minimum of two nails, hence the use of the plural.
I do not have a uncompromising view of this matter however, because, as noted frequently, the Scriptures are not definitive on the matter. But I am not aware yet of a successful challenge to our view, despite the many learned attempts at such. 😊
 
 

No John, lol. The Greek word is HAND, so to translate it correctly, one must say hand in English also. But yes, you are right, the picture is a contradiction, unless of course you include the wrist when you say hand
Good night!

There is something about the inability to distinguish between what is important and what is not that I will never understand. It is closely associated with the inability to distinguish between the traffic cop's direction about best motoring from the orders of Hitler to gas millions.
If you are going to use the grandiose terminology that you do, use it over things deserving of it.

In Croatian, word "ruka" (as equivalent (i think) to English word arm), arm is upper limb in man with a shoulder joint connected to the body. It consists of the upper arm, forearm and hand. The upper arm and the forearm together form the elbow joint. And the forearm with the fist forms hand wrist.
When in Croatian we said "ruka" , that can mean all limb (arm) and  also one particular part,  hand (palm, fingers, and thumb=fist). When you shake in greetings you practically moves all limb (arm) but one part making this main meaning, your hand (again "ruka" in Croatian).
Take your hands in the air. (Digni ruke u zrak.)
The friends stretched out their hands/arms (they were giving hands to each other) and then they were shaking hands. (Prijatelji su ispružili ruke jedan drugome i onda su se rukovali.

Hi folks. Just breezing through.  I've not dropped off the end of the earth - I'm just *really* busy. Got a notification on my email saying the Librarian wanted to know if Leolaia's excellent article "Jehovah's Witnesses and the Cross" was still available. The previous link is now dead, apparently.
Try here: http://www.forananswer.org/Top_JW/jwcross.pdf 
Glad to see these discussions are still going. Hi and bye

What if.....
But what if the simple reason is that as we learn new evidence for things we grow in knowledge and so we are able to correct previous ideas? I agree, perhaps some of the mistakes are because of the influence of Satan, because he does not want anyone to know the TRUTH, but for me (at least) the important thing is that the fundamental truths remain he same. Those are the important truths and they are very simple. The rest is just "frills" (like frilly petticoats on a dress). If we get some "frills" wrong then to me it is not really important.
For example in this particular discussion: Knowing whether Jesus died on a cross or died on a stake is just "frills", the important fundamental truth is that we do not use whatever object we think it was in worship, because that is idolatry. 

I don't know....I will have to try that. But I very much doubt if I made it known that I don't agree with the point made in the What does the Bible really teach book or the What does the Bible teach us book (which replaces the Bible teach book) where it categorically states on page 213  that Jesus did not die on a cross that I would get disfellowshipped or be declared an Apostate. In fact it would be a good idea if this statement was changed, and I may write a letter to Bethel to that effect. And not an anonymous letter, one with my name and return address on it. And I will let you know what reply I get, ok?

Pretty much Restorationism to the roots. You learn and apply just as the church has done in the past.