Church Removes Cross To Be "More Inclusive"

[jabcat]

What if Jesus was crucified on a tree and not a cross?

I think you are right about that: Start reading at Reply #19

I've thought about this some more.  I said earlier that perhaps a stake is a form of a generic term that could include cross or tree - i.e., something stuck in the ground, and made of wood from a tree.  That could be a pole, a beam, a stake, a cross, a tree, etc.  Also, more recent archaelogical evidence apparently indicates the Romans did in fact use a cross (2 pieces of wood/poles/stakes) crossed, for at least some of their crucifixions.  Maybe we won't know for sure until He tells us.  In the meantime,

He was bruised for our trangressions, and by His stripes we are healed.

[reFORMer]

"The other disciples, then, said to him, "We have seen the Lord!" Yet he said to them, "Should I not perceive in His hands the print of the nails, and thrust my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will by no means be believing." (John 22:25, CLT)

That Thomas should say, "...in His hands the print of the nails," with nails plural, indicates Jesus was not crucified on a "pole."  That hardly makes it an important point of difference, however.

As for what symbol might best represent the Christians?  From the earlies times up until Constantine, the most common piece of Christian graffiti was the "Orante," the figure of a woman, half the time veiled, often with upraised hands.  This was perhaps borrowed from Egyptian mystery religions, though specially Greek representations of "Wisdom," Sophia, as a woman.  The Orante would often appear central to some Bible story, like in the belly of Jonah's great fish, which is how Christians viewed their place in the Roman Empire.  She might be sketched taking the place of Daniel in the fiery furnace.  How is it to be interpreted, while conjectored, seems obvious.  They knew what it meant not just to be individual sons of God, but a level even beyond "one-anothering."  They experienced being that corporate expression of His body, His BRIDE!

While some I have read say the cross as a Christian symbol possibly originates with Constantine, though what he saw in his famous vision as the sign in which he would conquor, was more accurately an "ankh," something like a capitol "T" with a circle on top.  That was the egyptian symbol of immortal life.  It seems though that its use by Christians must predate Constantine use of it since he knew what it was, identifying it with Christian doctines.

As for the sign of the fish?  It was invented by perhaps Cecil B. DeMille in the mid 20th century for movies of the time.

[jabcat]

WW, you asked me what's the Christian symbol.  You and James (reFORMer have offered interesting info on that.  My response was not what should be, but what often is used as or perceived to be.

I did find this here ( eureka4you.com ).  Don't know if they're correct, but here's what they have to say;

The fish's first known use as a Christian religious symbol was sometime within the first three centuries AD. Christians began using the Greek word for "fish" as an anagram/acronym for "Jesus Christ God's Son, Savior." More about this later.  

The fish outline is a logical symbol for the early Christian church to adopt. Not only was fish a common food of the day, it was also used by Jesus during His ministry.  
.

Mark 1:17 "Come after Me, and I will make you become fishers of men."
Matthew 12:40 "...Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."
Matthew 14:17 "And they said to Him, 'We have here only five loaves and two fish.'"
Luke 5:6 "And when they had done this, they caught a great number of fish, and their net was breaking."
Luke 24:42 "So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb."  
John 21:6 "And He said to them, 'Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.' So they cast, and now they were not able to draw it in because of the multitude of fish." 

.
A 'fishy' tale?
In the years following the ascension of the resurrected Jesus to heaven, the Christian church grew rapidly.
Christians soon found themselves to be the subjects of persecution by both the Romans and the Jews.
In many locales, it became dangerous to be known as a Christian.
Thus, when two strangers met and thought maybe they were fellow believers, one of them would draw, on the ground, the upper half of the fish symbol.

Recognizing the symbol, the stranger would add a second curved line and complete the drawing of a fish.  
.
It is a very simple shape to draw - just two curved strokes. It could be drawn quickly, and erased just as quickly if there was no sign of recognition on the part of the stranger.  

.
The 'Greek' connection, #1
We do not know whether the story above is true but we do know that the fish's first known use as a Christian religious symbol was sometime within the first three centuries AD. Possibly around the 16th century Christians began using the Greek word ichthys for "fish". Ichthys is the most commonly used word in the New Testament for fish.
Ichthys consists of five letters from the Greek alphabet: I-ch-th-y-s. When these five letters are used as initials for five words, we obtain this Christian Declaration: Iesous Christos Theou Yios Soter. This is an acrostic for 'Jesus Christ, God's Son, Savior.' - End Quote

.

[WhiteWings]

While some I have read say the cross as a Christian symbol possibly originates with Constantine, though what he saw in his famous vision as the sign in which he would conquor, was more accurately an "ankh," something like a capitol "T" with a circle on top.  That was the egyptian symbol of immortal life.  It seems though that its use by Christians must predate Constantine use of it since he knew what it was, identifying it with Christian doctines.

http://hikmatun.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/ankh.jpg
Seems everyone has read something different :sigh:
I wonder if there are any authorative works on it.

As for the sign of the fish?  It was invented by perhaps Cecil B. DeMille in the mid 20th century for movies of the time.

It seems to be frequently used in the catacombs.

[reFORMer]

There's a book published first in France and later, in 1983, in English (or that's what I think I remember.)  Its titled ANTE PACEM which means "Before the Peace," referring before Constantine.  It is a work of many photos of Christian art from that period, roughly the first 300 years of Christianity.  There is no fish.  This book is mostly uninterpreted archeological information.  There's been very little Christian archeology.  Most is pre-Christian Biblical archeology in the land of Israel.

[WhiteWings]

Many page of the book (2003 edition) can be previewed here.

[WhiteWings]

About the cross/stake/pole. It seems to be a bit more complicated like that.
Basicly they called any straight piece of wood a pole. (pole is possibly not the best English translation)
The horizontal part Jezus carried was a pole. (it was a very common way to treat slaves)
The vertical part was called a pole also. And strange enough the combination also.
Anyway I'm still getting more convinced it wasn't a cross as commonly thought.
Not a pole either... Just a living tree with a vertical pole/plank nailed to it.
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:yc2iI60kT2KIqM:http://www.thelemapedia.org/images/4/45/Ankh.gif)

The ankh is Egyptian for me but with a little fantasy it's a tree with a horizonal pole..... :icon_jokercolor:

BTW if the ankh was so important to early Christians I would expect it to see in the Christian catacombs.
Does anyone know about a good site with lots of such pictures?

[WhiteWings]

I did read somewhere that only Jesus being nailed to a tree would fullfill a OT prophecy.
Maybe looking at the OT holds the proof we are looking for...?

[CHB]

About the cross/stake/pole. It seems to be a bit more complicated like that.
Basicly they called any straight piece of wood a pole. (pole is possibly not the best English translation)
The horizontal part Jezus carried was a pole. (it was a very common way to treat slaves)
The vertical part was called a pole also. And strange enough the combination also.
Anyway I'm still getting more convinced it wasn't a cross as commonly thought.
Not a pole either... Just a living tree with a vertical pole/plank nailed to it.
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:yc2iI60kT2KIqM:http://www.thelemapedia.org/images/4/45/Ankh.gif)

The ankh is Egyptian for me but with a little fantasy it's a tree with a horizonal pole..... :icon_jokercolor:

BTW if the ankh was so important to early Christians I would expect it to see in the Christian catacombs.
Does anyone know about a good site with lots of such pictures?

WhiteWings,

I have to agree with you. Jesus carried the cross piece that was nailed to the tree, not the whole cross. He couldn't have picked up a cross, two pieces. It would have taken two or three men to carry a cross heavy enough to crucify Jesus on.

CHB

[Nathan]

If it's true that he was carrying just a cross beam . . .was this beam not fastened to his outstretched arms?  If so . . .what was it that Simon the Cyrene had to then carry when Jesus stumbled and fell on his way to his crucifixion?

[Beloved Servant]

Perhaps it was THE SAME TREE that Adam and Eve ate from.

[WhiteWings]

The Greek and Latin words corresponding to "crucifixion" applied to many different forms of painful execution, from impaling on a stake to affixing to a tree, to an upright pole (a crux simplex) or to a combination of an upright (in Latin, stipes) and a crossbeam (in Latin, patibulum).[5]

If a crossbeam was used, the condemned man was forced to carry it on his shoulders, which could have been torn open by flagellation, to the place of execution. A whole cross would weigh well over 300 pounds (135 kilograms), but the crossbeam would weigh only 75–125 pounds (35–60 kilograms).[6] The Roman historian Tacitus records that the city of Rome had a specific place for carrying out executions, situated outside the Esquiline Gate,[7] and had a specific area reserved for the execution of slaves by crucifixion.[8] Upright posts would presumably be fixed permanently in that place, and the crossbeam, with the condemned person perhaps already nailed to it, would then be attached to the post.

So various methods were used.
Most people can't lift a full cross. (not even drag it) Certainly not after being tortured a whole night. Even the beam is heavy.
Various verses use word tree. One verse even mentions a green tree.

^KJVJoh 19:32-33  32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.
33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:

Little riddle. If Jesus was hanging in the middle of the thiefs why did the soldiers break teh legs of the thiefs first?
Why not in the obvious order thief-Jesus-thief?

Sorry for getting way off-topic James.... Maybe merge certain posts with other thread? Now we are double crossed :laughing7:

[WhiteWings]

Perhaps it was THE SAME TREE that Adam ans Eve ate from.

Must have been a very old tree then. I think the tree was in current Iraq.
That said I agree with the tree.
Death started with taking  from a tree.
Death ended with adding to a tree. (in a way grafted in)
For me a nice living tree has much more symbolic value than a few pieces of dead wood.

[reFORMer]

I used the link WhiteWings provided to ANTE PACEM and found I'd misspelled "Orante" so it has been corrected.

[CHB]

If it's true that he was carrying just a cross beam . . .was this beam not fastened to his outstretched arms?  If so . . .what was it that Simon the Cyrene had to then carry when Jesus stumbled and fell on his way to his crucifixion?

Hi Nathan,

I believe Jesus hands or arms were nailed to the crosspiece after he reached the place of execution.

CHB

[WhiteWings]

I think Nathan means tied to the beam.
That's method was used often for agressive  prisioners. Also in "our" time. You see it for example in Roots. The movie about the black slaves. But that usally was nothing more than a stick.

I checked several translations; many including KJV could haved been clearer

Matthew 27:32 Now as they went out, they found a Cyrenian himan named Simon; they forced him into service to pick up His stake.

"pick up" sounds like Jesus dropped it. Not that He was still tied to it. Altough not mentioned in the verse the Romans could have cut the ropes before Simon picked up the stake.
A single beam can be carried (crux simplex). A cross can't. It's totally out of balance. So it would more like "drag His cross"
Just test it yourself. No sleep, food or drink for a night. Then take a 300 pound bag and carry it uphill. Even a strong healty man would have quite  a task on that.
I don't know the build of Jesus (I think very average); then whipped all night long.... :sigh:
The whips were not just like  a horsewhip. I don't know how they are called in English but they had many strings.
Some knotted. Some with razor blade things on the end. And some with 'fishing hooks'. My guess is Jesus had no flesh left on His back... :mshock:

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: I think it was called a scourge and a cat-o-nine-tails because it had 9 strands with bits of sharp bone and stones on the ends of it, so it would shred the skin it whipped.

Probably had even had ribs exposed, possibly even internal organs, according to one account I read of a doctor looking at Calvary experience. Not much meat on the ribs area to go through.

Interesting also, is that the number 9 is in the pattern of the candlestick, and in the fruit and gifts of the Spirit. Blessings...

[WhiteWings]

Years ago I was channel surfing and caught just part of a message by a TV preacher talking about Jesus Christ being flogged by a Roman cat of nine tails. He described the whip as a nine strap, lead tipped whip embedded with nails, glass and bone. That caught my attention. I had NEVER heard that before. He stated that Jesus had lost so much blood from the scourging, he was too weak to carry his own cross.I didn't know the first century historian FLAVIOUS JOSEPHUS noted that "certain rebel Jews were torn to pieces by the scourge before being crucified""their bodies were frightfully lacerated. Christian martyrs in Smyrna were so torn by the scourges that their veins were laid bare, and the inner muscles, sinews, even entrails, were exposed".



(http://naturesdesignsonline.com/images/P2120018.jpg)
(http://naturesdesignsonline.com/catofninetails/P2050012.jpg)

Much more info here.

[micah7:9]

Back in the late 70's I got a hold of a book "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop
It may have been proved to be just an anti catholic book, but beginning on page 197 the book begins the history of the cross and he says that the cross or "TAU".
"That which is now called the Christian cross, was originally no Christian emblem at all, but was the mystic Tau of the Chaldeans and Egyptians...." and he goes on. Any body else heard of the book or read it?

[WhiteWings]

The Two Babylons - online version
The Two Babylons - pdf version

The cross has a pagan origin. That's simply a fact. (rebirth of the sun)
But that of course doesn't automaticly mean it can't be Christian.
Many religions predating Christianity also had virgin birth and a son of god living among humans to name just two things.

What chapter and section is page 197?
The book only has 196 pages..???

Found one more:
The two Babylons or Papal worship proven to be Nimrod and his wife. (1862)

The pope part of a cult? I shoulda know when I first saw that Dagot fish hat :icon_king:

[micah7:9]

My hardcover has 290 pgs. plus it goes to page 323 with appendix. Personally I dont care about any of the christian accumulated symbols in the christian world. I reason that they all become idols at some point.

[Nathan]

This thread has been yet another eye-opener on bringing a little more clarity to things.  I had always wondered how could a physical man have all or most of all his flesh ripped from his back and then forced to carry this 300 pound cross all through the streets . . .but seeing that it may have more likely been a cross "beam" that was later attached to a perpendicular pole does seem to fit the situation. 

And when it comes to "that was pagan before it was Christian" . . .for me, I'd have to ask what if the pagans were getting it from their ancestors . . .who if you go back far enough . . .got at least bits and pieces of their beliefs from their ancestors who were there when these things were originally handed down . . .by God.

All men, if you go back far enough, came from Noah . . .who obviously knew something about the laws of God . . .yes?

[jabcat]

yep

[thinktank]

This thread has been yet another eye-opener on bringing a little more clarity to things.  I had always wondered how could a physical man have all or most of all his flesh ripped from his back and then forced to carry this 300 pound cross all through the streets . . .but seeing that it may have more likely been a cross "beam" that was later attached to a perpendicular pole does seem to fit the situation. 

And when it comes to "that was pagan before it was Christian" . . .for me, I'd have to ask what if the pagans were getting it from their ancestors . . .who if you go back far enough . . .got at least bits and pieces of their beliefs from their ancestors who were there when these things were originally handed down . . .by God.

All men, if you go back far enough, came from Noah . . .who obviously knew something about the laws of God . . .yes?

Yeah enoch was close to God and is mentioned in the bible prophesying the end times when God comes back to destroy the wicked, so he would know many other things as well, I think Abraham was the first man who knew about the birth of Christ though, for God was his friend and God speaks many things to his friends and the practice play of the sacrifice with Abrahams son confirms this I think. Yeah God speaks many things to his friends, as you can tell by my writings  :Sparkletooth:, but seriously though I think we all would like to be called Gods friend, but it is only a few that he gives this privelage too and I think it would require a level of service and intimacy, most of us would shy away from.

[micah7:9]

Mat 27:32  And coming forth, they found a man, a Cyrenian, by name Simon: him they impressed that he might bear his cross;
Mar 15:21  And they impress a certain one passing by--Simon, a Cyrenian, coming from the field, the father of Alexander and Rufus--that he may bear his cross,
Luk 23:26  And as they led him away, having taken hold on Simon, a certain Cyrenian, coming from the field, they put on him the cross, to bear it behind Jesus.
Joh 19:17  and bearing his cross, he went forth to the place called Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew Golgotha;

Just wondering, that whip and the damage it did to the body of a human being, and He was at this point a man of flesh, bone, and blood carrying hardly his own body. What point could possibly be taken away for a believer to grow on? I am not saying no to it, but it is only recorded by John, and I see the first four words of John as POWERFULL, for spiritual warfare. my  :2c: Peace and Love Through Jesus