Saturday, April 25, 2009

Re: The Shroud of Turin: Evidence that Jesus was crucified on a cross, not a stake

AN

Thanks for your message. I will respond to your question publicly

[Above: Shroud of Turin: World-Mysteries.com. The direction and patterns of the bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin show that the man whose image is imprinted on it, died on a cross with both his arms outstretched to the side and nailed:

"In addition, by measuring the angle of dried blood on the wrist, one can reconstruct the angle at which this person hung from the cross. He mainly hung from a position 65 degrees from the horizontal. But there is another angle of dried blood at 55 degrees. This shows that this person tried to lift himself up by 10 degrees. Why? Medical studies show that if a person just hangs from a position of 65 degrees in would start to suffocate very quickly. Only if he could lift himself up by about 10 degrees would he be able to breathe. Thus he would have to raise himself up by this 10 degrees by pushing down on his feet which would have to have been fixed to the cross. He would then become exhausted and fall down again to the 65 degree position. Thus, he would continue to shift from these two agonizing positions throughout crucifixion. That is why the executioners of crucifixion would break the legs of their victims to speed up death. If they could not lift themselves up to breathe, they would suffocate very quickly." (Shroud of Turin: World-Mysteries.com).

See also `tagline' quotes at the end of this post. If this is Jesus, and the evidence is overwhelming that it is (see for example my also as yet unfinished series, Re: There is compelling evidence it is the burial cloth of Christ, or a man crucified during that time #1, on my TheShroudofTurin blog), then this is further archeological and scientific evidence (if not absolute proof ) that Jesus was crucified on a two-beamed cross and not a single stake as the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society claims].

via my blog, JesusisJehovah!, minus your personal identifying information, i.e. substituting "AN" for your name.

I am also copying this reply to my TheShroudofTurin blog,

[Right (click to enlarge): Jesus `impaled' on a single stake with both arms together over his head affixed by one nail: "What Does the Bible Really Teach?," Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 2005, p.52. This is how the Watchtower Society has consistently depicted Jesus' execution since 1950 at least.]

because it may be of interest to my readers there. Although they may be unaware of (and astonished at) the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society's (Jehovah's Witnesses') claim that Jesus was not crucified with both arms outspread and therefore affixed with two nails through both wrists on a cross, but was instead affixed by only one nail through both hands above His head on a single upright stake.

----- Original Message - ----
From: AN
To: Stephen E. Jones
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 4:09 AM
Subject: Stake/Cross comments continued?..

>Hello, Stephen!
>
>My name's AN and I'm from Russia (so excuse me, please, for my poor English). I've read with a great interest your articles (
#1-#3) about stake/cross controversy in your blog.
>
>I've been waiting for continuation since autumn and so have a question: do you plan to publish new posts (as you stated: "#4 Patristic, #5 Archaeological, #6 Pagan, #7 Biblical and #8 Conclusion") on this theme?

Thanks for your reminder. Quite frankly I have been so busy, what with, researching and posting my Jesus is Jehovah in the New Testament series, going back to university to become a science teacher and debating with JWs on Shazoolo's and Newagegamer's YouTube boards, that this had been moved to the backburner.

However, I do intend to continue with that series. I have now moved my draft next post in the series, "Was Jesus executed on a cross or a stake? #3D: Historical" out of my Drafts 2008 folder into my current Drafts folder and will try to finish it this Sunday, if not this week.

>Thanx for your work!
>Waiting for your reply,
>AN

Thanks again for your reminder and for your patience.

PS: Note in the `tagline' quotes below, that if the hands of the man on the Shroud had been affixed by one nail to a single upright pole, then the blood flows from his wrists would have been vertical, i.e. straight down the arms, not 65-55% to the vertical. So this is yet another nail (pun intended) in the Watchtower Society's coffin!

Stephen E. Jones.
My other blogs: CreationEvolutionDesign & TheShroudofTurin


"We are now drawn to the wounds of the crucifixion itself. First we must establish that we can be quite confident we are dealing with a crucifixion victim. The principal evidence for this lies in the flows of blood from the wound in the left wrist. One of the most important aspects is the angle of the two streams of blood closest to the hand, flowing toward the inner border of the forearm.

[Left (click to enlarge): The 55-65% angle of the Shroud victim's arms on the cross, deduced from the paths of the bloodflows on them (Wilson, 1978, pl.12.]

Other, interrupted streams run along the length of the arm as far as the elbow, dripping toward the edge of the arm at angles similar to the original flows. The first two flows are about ten degrees apart, the somewhat thinner one at an angle of about fifty-five degrees from the axis of the arm and the broader one closer to the hand at about sixty-five degrees. This enables us to do two things: (1) to compute that at the time the blood flowed, the arms must have been raised at positions varying between fifty-five and sixty-five degrees from the vertical, i.e., clearly a crucifixion position; (2) to compute that because of the ten-degree difference the crucified man must have assumed two slightly different positions on the cross, that at sixty-five degrees representing full suspension of the body, that at fifty-five degrees a slightly more acute angle of the forearm produced by flexing the elbow to raise the body. We are enabled to deduce then that the crucifixion forced on the victim an up-and-down or seesaw motion on the cross-perhaps, according to one school of thought, in order to breathe, the arms in that position taking a tension equal to nearly twice the weight of the body, inducing near-suffocation if there was no crutch support; perhaps, according to another school of thought, by the victim attempting to relieve himself of one unbearable agony, the pain in his wrists, by raising himself, at the price of yet more pain, on the living wounds in his feet." (Wilson, I., 1978, "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, pp.25-26).

"For the first clear evidence that the Shroud shows a victim of crucifixion, we now turn to the next group of injuries, which take the form of what appear to be blood flows in the region of the hands and lower arms. On the man of the Shroud's left wrist can be seen two separately angled blood flows, one broad, the other thin and long; then, after a gap of a few centimeters, at least six blood rivulets appear to flow on toward the elbow joint. Although the right wrist is obscured by the left, the presence of similar bloodstains on this arm suggests a similarly originating injury. As before, it is the underlying logic that is so compelling. Each rivulet of blood ends its course pointing in a specific direction, from which it can be calculated that when the majority of the rivulets flowed, the man of the Shroud's arms must have been at an angle of 65 degrees from the vertical-i.e., clearly a crucifixion position. Only one rivulet is different, the longer and thinner of those at the wrist, which indicates not 65 but 55 degrees from the vertical. To pathologists, this single flow almost certainly indicates the attitude the arms assumed at death, at which time the head would have been slumped and one elbow flexed at a more acute angle." (Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.22).

"Which leads us to the third category of injuries visible on the Shroud, the bloodflows as from piercings to the hands and feet. First let us take the trickles that can be seen on each forearm ... As various medical and other researchers have demonstrated, if these are, projected and painted onto a living model's arms and his arms are then moved to the position that their gravitational flow would seem to indicate, it can immediately be seen that at the time the blood flowed each arm must have been stretched out sideways at an approximate angle of sixty-five degrees, i.e. a crucifixion position ...

[Right (click to enlarge): Transpositions of the Shroud's forearms bloodflows onto a living man, showing the man on the Shroud's living (top) and dead (bottom) positions on the cross. (Wilson, 1998, pl. 18a-b).]

We cannot see the source of the trickle down the right forearm because its wrist and upper hand are covered by the fingers of the left hand. But this is more than compensated for by the fact that a `/\'shaped bloodstain is clearly visible on the left wrist, the apex of this, at the centre of the bending fold, being obviously the site of the puncture wound from which the blood flowed. The `/\' shape to the bloodstain also theoretically seems to indicate the two different positions that the man of the Shroud must have adopted while suspended, either denoting his agonising shifting from one position to another or, as some have suggested, the position his arms took at death." (Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, pp.34-35).

"Blood flowed along the arms while they were extended on the cross. At several points on the left forearm the blood was deflected and flowed vertically down the side. At the back of the left hand there are two trickles of blood which also flowed vertically during the crucifixion. These streams are still in their original position in relation to the arm and the hand. Thus they enable us to calculate the angle at which the arms were extended on the cross-about 65 degrees from the vertical. In the imprints of the Shroud we have an exact portrayal of the technique of crucifixion, and of one crucifixion in particular which supplies for the reticence of the Evangelists." (Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961, p.45).

23 comments:

thedude said...

So what if he died on a cross or a stake.

It makes no difference.

thedude said...

If you believe that Jesus is Jehovah then you are denying that Jesus is the prophet that was prophesied to come in Deut 18.

Jesus is the prophet that was to come, prophet like Moses. Moses was a prophet of Jehovah, he spoke for Jehovah. Prophet is one that speaks for God. Jesus is a prophet of Jehovah, thus can not be Jehovah.

Stephen E. Jones said...

thedude

Thanks for your comment.

>So what if he died on a cross or a stake.
>
>It makes no difference.

It does make a difference to Jehovah's Witnesses.

If Jesus died on a cross (which He did), then the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is a false teacher (which it is), because it has claimed since at least 1950, that Jesus died on a single upright stake, not a cross.

Stephen E. Jones

Stephen E. Jones said...

the dude

Again, thanks for your comment.

>If you believe that Jesus is Jehovah

I don't just "believe" that Jesus of the New Testament is Jehovah of the Old Testament. The Bible teaches it, in hundreds of verses.

Read my series, "Jesus is Jehovah in the New Testament."

>then you are denying that Jesus is the prophet that was prophesied to come in Deut 18.

No. I affirm the NT teaching (Jn 1:45; 6:14; 7:40; Ac 3:22) that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the prophecy in Dt 18:14-22 that Jehovah will raise up a prophet from among them like Moses.

>Jesus is the prophet that was to come, prophet like Moses.

Agreed.

>Moses was a prophet of Jehovah, he spoke for Jehovah.

Agreed.

>Prophet is one that speaks for God.

Agreed.

>Jesus is a prophet of Jehovah, thus can not be Jehovah.

No. Jesus is Jehovah the Son who speaks the words of Jehovah the Father (Jn 8:28; 12:49; 14:10,24). Therefore Jesus is both a prophet of Jehovah and He is Jehovah.

See my "Jesus is Jehovah in the New Testament: Index" where I state:

"That the Lord Jesus Christ is revealed in the New Testament as being Jehovah (Heb. Yahweh) of the Old Testament, does not preclude the other two Persons of the Holy Trinity (Mt 28:19; 2Cor 13:14; 1Pet 1:2): the Father (Dt 32:6; Isa 63:16; 64:8; Mal 1:6) and the Holy Spirit (Isa 61:1; Lk 4:18; 2Cor 3:17), also being, as revealed in the New Testament, Jehovah: the one Triune God."

Stephen E. Jones

thedude said...

No one knows what Jesus died on because a Stauros was not diagrammed in the Bible.

The WT and JWs just stress not to use it in worship and to worship it.

thedude said...

"Jesus is Jehovah the Son who speaks the words of Jehovah the Father"

So this is where things get all discombobulated.

Whatever happened to Deut 6:4
"`Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God [is] one Jehovah;"


" also being, as revealed in the New Testament, Jehovah: the one Triune God.""


All of that is so extrabiblical.

Stephen E. Jones said...

the dude

>No one knows what Jesus died on because a Stauros was not diagrammed in the Bible.

Of course there was no diagram, but the Bible does indicate it was a two-beamed cross rather than a single upright stake:

1) The "print of the nails" (plural) were in Jesus' hands (Jn 20:25 NWT);

2) The charge was "posted above his head" (Mt 27:37 NWT), not above His hands; and

3) Jesus prophesied to Peter of the "sort of death he would" have, that "you will stretch out your hands (Jn 21:18-19 NWT), and history records that Peter was crucified.

This is contrary to the WT's artistic depictions of Jesus hanging on a single upright stake with His hands over His head, affixed by a single nail through both wrists, and the charge over His hands, not over His head. See for example the WT's depiction in my "Was Jesus executed on a cross or a stake? #3C: Historical."

>The WT and JWs just stress not to use it in worship and to worship it.

Christians don't "worship" the cross and there is no Biblical reason why a cross should not be used in worship.

And while the WT now, because the evidence is overwhelming that Jesus did die on a two-beamed cross and not a single upright stake, is starting to backpedal by emphasising its problem is Christians worshipping the cross (which they don't) and using it in worship (see the WT's "Did Jesus Really Die on a Cross?"), nevertheless the WT has since at least 1950 claimed that Jesus did not die on a two-beamed cross, but on a single upright stake or pole.

For example, at least a recent as 2005, the WT in its book, "What Does the Bible Really Teach?" restated its position that "Jesus ... did not die on a cross" but rather "was put to death on a ... stake" (my emphasis below):

"Jesus ... NAILED TO A STAKE, he took his last breath ..." (p.46).

"... Jesus ... experienced ... cruel IMPALEMENT, and an agonizing death on a TORTURE STAKE." (p.51).

"Jesus ... was put to death on a TORTURE STAKE ... " (p.77).

"... Jesus Christ DID NOT DIE ON A CROSS ... two pieces of timber placed across one another ..." (p.204).

So if in fact Jesus did die on a two-beamed cross (as the evidence overwhelmingly indicates He did), then the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, has been teaching a falsehood about Jesus since at least 1950, i.e. for 59 years or 45% of its existence!

Stephen E. Jones

Stephen E. Jones said...



thedude

>Whatever happened to Deut 6:4 "`Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God [is] one Jehovah;"

The Heb. word 'echad "one" in Dt 6:4 can mean a COMPOUND UNITY. For example, in the Old Testament 'echad is used in the compound unity "one flesh" of husband and wife (Gn 2:24); "one people" of many individuals (Gn 11:6; 34:16,22); "one voice" of "all the people" (Ex 24:3); "one cluster of grapes" (Num 13:23); and "one stick" joined to "another stick" making a compound "one stick" (Eze 37:16-17).

The Messianic Jewish "Torah-Observant Followers of Yeshua" in their "Statement of Beliefs," points 2 and 3, cite Dt 6:4 as supporting that "YHWH is a compound unity":

"YHWH [the LORD] is our Elohim. He is echad [One]. He alone is YHWH. Deuteronomy 6:4. ... The nature of YHWH is a compound unity expressed in the aspects of Abba [God, the Father], Yeshua [Salvation, Jesus, the Son, Messiah] and the Ruach HaKodesh [the Holy Spirit/Breath] in this age. Matthew 28:19.

The Apostle Paul actually uses the words of the Jewish Shema in Dt 6:4 NWT:

"Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah"

to create a Christian Shema, in 1Cor 8:6 NWT:

"... there is actually to us one God the Father .. and there is ONE LORD JESUS CHRIST ..."

Since 1Cor 8:6 clearly says there is only "one Lord" and He is "Jesus Christ," JWs who deny that Jesus is Jehovah, must deny that Jehovah is Lord!

>All of that is so extrabiblical.

No. As I am showing in my series, "Jesus is Jehovah in the New Testament," it is fully Biblical that": "Jesus is Jehovah, i.e. the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament is, in His pre-incarnate Divine nature, Jehovah (Heb. Yahweh) of the Old Testament."

From your support of WT doctrines, I assume you are either a JW, or an ex-JW who is still under the influence of the WT. Which is why I quoted from the NWT, for your benefit and for the benefit of any other JW readers.

Whatever you are, as I state upfront in my policies, I don't have the time, or inclination, to debate down here in comments (it has taken me the best part of today to answer your questions). So you can have the last word under this post if you want to.

My last word to you under this post is to read carefully and prayerfully all that I have written on this site on this topic, as well as in my 2007 post "Jesus is Jehovah! to my CED blog, which cites many Bible verses to support that claim.

Stephen E. Jones

Stephen E. Jones said...

Here is an extract of my response to a comment on my TheShroudofTurin blog, under the copy of this blog post there, which is JW-related.

[...]

>I love how this one takes a nice swing at the silly claim of the JW claim. One wonders what in the world they are thinking sometimes.

They don't think for themselves. The Watchtower Society warns JWs to "Avoid Independent Thinking":

"Avoid Independent Thinking From the very outset of his rebellion Satan called into question God's way of doing things. He promoted independent thinking. `You can decide for yourself what is good and bad,' Satan told Eve. `You don't have to listen to God. He is not really telling you the truth.' (Genesis 3:1-5) To this day, it has been Satan's subtle design to infect God's people with this type of thinking.-2 Timothy 3:1, 13. How is such independent thinking manifested? A common way is by questioning the counsel that is provided by God's visible organization. ...." ("Exposing the Devil's Subtle Designs," The Watchtower, January 15, 1983, pp.18-22, p.22)

and even to "Fight Against Independent Thinking":

"Fight Against Independent Thinking As we study the Bible we learn that Jehovah has always guided his servants in an organized way. And just as in the first century there was only one true Christian organization, so today Jehovah is using only one organization. (Ephesians 4:4, 5; Matthew 24:45-47) Yet there are some who point out that the organization has had to make adjustments before, and so they argue: `This shows that we have to make up our own mind on what to believe.' This is independent thinking. Why is it so dangerous? Such thinking is an evidence of pride. ... If we get to thinking that we know better than the organization, we should ask ourselves: `Where did we learn Bible truth in the first place? Would we know the way of the truth if it had not been for guidance from the organization? Really, can we get along without the direction of God's organization?' No, we cannot! ... When we consider the mighty spirit forces who are fighting against us, we must acknowledge that on our own we could not possibly win. Yet with God's backing, and with the help and support of his organization-our worldwide association of brothers-we cannot lose. ..." ("Armed for the Fight Against Wicked Spirits," The Watchtower, January 15, 1983, pp.23-27, p.27)

which means unthinking and unquestioning obedience to the Watchtower organization, which is really the JW's god.

>Along with the Mormon claim, this is such a house of cards that any study, be it Theological, historical and in this case scientific will blow a mighty wind a knock the house over.

The problem is that for JWs and the Mormons their ultimate ground of belief is not in the Bible, nor in any objective evidence, but it is their respective cultic organizations, the Watchtower Society and the LDS Church.

But that is why a JW's faith might be shaken more by evidence that the Watchtower Society has been wrong for nearly 60 years in that Jesus really did die on a two-beamed cross and not a single upright stake, than by arguing about the meaning of Bible verses (which however does have its place).

[...]

Stephen E. Jones

thedude said...

"They don't think for themselves. The Watchtower Society warns JWs to "Avoid Independent Thinking":"

And you think that all JWs follow that exactly as you want them to?
Why are you quoting a 1983 Watchtower, which was specifically written for that time?

Stephen E. Jones said...

thedude

>And you think that all JWs follow that exactly as you want them to?

Point taken. Of course there are some JW's who think for themselves, for example all those ex-JWs who realised the Watchtower Society is a false teacher and false prophet, must have thought for themselves.

And of those who are still JWs and yet think for themselves (i.e. read anti-JW and especially ex-JW material), they are disobeying the Watchtower and in the long run most (if not all) would not remain JWs.

>Why are you quoting a 1983 Watchtower, which was specifically written for that time?

If you are a JW, you either are ignorant or are engaging in `theocratic warfare', i.e. lying for the Watchtower, because at least as recent as 2006, the Society again warned JWs against "independent thinking":

"In modern times, a very small number among God's people have become disgruntled with some aspect of Christian teaching and have murmured against the earthly part of Jehovah's organization. Why does this happen? Such murmuring is often caused by a lack of understanding of God's way of doing things. The Creator progressively reveals the truth to his people. Hence, our understanding of the Scriptures is bound to be refined from time to time. The vast majority of Jehovah's people rejoice over such refinements. A few become `righteous overmuch' and resent the changes. (Ecclesiastes 7:16) Pride may play a role, and SOME FALL INTO THE TRAP OF INDEPENDENT THINKING. Whatever the reason, such murmuring is hazardous, since it can draw us back into the world and its ways." ("Focus on the Goodness of Jehovah's Organization," The Watchtower, July 15, 2006, pp.19-23, p.22. My emphasis).

So when you write to the Watchtower Society and ask them if those 1983 Watchtower prohibitions against "independent thinking" still apply, and they reply in writing to you (or better still in The Watchtower's Questions from Readers) that no, JWs today are free to exercise independent thinking about the Watchtower and its doctrines, then I will take you seriously.

Indeed, if you are a JW I dare you to write that question to the Society and sign your real name. At the very least you would be counselled by your elders for even asking that question, indeed for even thinking it. And if you then did not give them a solemn undertaking not to ever think independently you would be disfellowshipped and then shunned by your JW family and friends as though you were dead. If you disagree, then try it and let me know the outcome.

Stephen E. Jones

waverider59 said...

I want to thank you for this discussion, just today 2 JW's showed up at my house and handed me a paper with absolute proof that Jesus Died on a stake not a cross.. anyway it's not the first time and won't be the last time ether.. I have done some of my own research on the subject.. On the Subject of Jesus is Jehovah we also are on the same page.. If God had a mirror to look into what do you suppose He would see??? His own reflection Jesus!!! Ask how long has Jehovah been Wise??-- Externally! Then ask who or what is wisdom?? 1Co 1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. The nature of God is more obvious in the details of life then in the big picture.. Anyway Thanks again, I'm always looking for new wisdom with my JW friends who are a constant challenge.... over

Stephen E. Jones said...

waverider59

>I want to thank you for this discussion,

Thank you for your comments.

>just today 2 JW's showed up at my house and handed me a paper with absolute proof that Jesus Died on a stake not a cross.

I would be interested in receiving a copy of that paper. Is it online? If so, can you give me the URL? If not, can you scan it and email it to me at sejonesATiinetDOTnetDOTau? I would like to respond to it via this blog.

>anyway it's not the first time and won't be the last time ether.. I have done some of my own research on the subject.

If you have anything more to add to my (unfinished) "Was Jesus executed on a cross or a stake?" I would be interested to know it.

>On the Subject of Jesus is Jehovah we also are on the same page.

Great!

Stephen

Anonymous said...

Hi, Im slightly confused, some of my family are witnesses and iv been going to their meetings.
What do you mean by Jesus is Jehovah?
iv not heard anyone say that before but do you mean they are the same?

Anonymous said...

Okay, I would also say that (looking at the shroud of turin) that people seem to think the nails went through his hands but clearly they went through the wrist...? so why would people say that and I know back then the wrist was also part of the hand.

Also I think that if he were of the stake the blood would have dripped the same way as it shows on the shroud.

Stephen E. Jones said...

Anonymous

>Hi, Im slightly confused, some of my family are witnesses and iv been going to their meetings.

You will be confused if you have subconsciously internalised the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society's polytheistic teaching that Jehovah is the Almighty God and Jesus is only a mighty God:

"Christ is called `The mighty God' at Isaiah 9:6, `a god' at John 1:1 (NW) ... Jehovah is not the only god or strong one. The very fact that he is called the Almighty God indicates that there are other gods not so mighty, not almighty like him." (Watchtower, September 1, 1955, p.543.

"Jesus is a god, a mighty god, and so is Jehovah a God, a mighty God." Watchtower, September 15, 1961, p.551)

>What do you mean by Jesus is Jehovah?

See the heading of this blog: "My commentary on the Bible's teaching that Jesus of the New Testament is Jehovah of the Old Testament come in the flesh."

>iv not heard anyone say that before but do you mean they are the same?

Jesus is God the Son, Second Person of the Trinity, come in the flesh. He is Jehovah (Heb. YHWH) of the Old Testament who appeared to men, e.g. Abraham (Gn 12:7; 17:1; 18:1), Moses (Ex 33:11; Num 12:7-8; Dt 34:10) and Isaiah (Isa 6:1-5):

Jn 1:18 NWT. "No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him."

No man has seen, or can see, God the Father:

1Tim 6:16 NWT. "[God] the one alone having immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom not one of men has seen or can see."

Jn 12:36-41, even in the NWT, makes it clear that Jehovah whom Isaiah saw in Isa 6:1-10 was the pre-incarnate Jesus.

Read my post "Jesus is Jehovah!" and my series, "Jesus is Jehovah in the New Testament."

Stephen

Stephen E. Jones said...

Anonymous

>Okay, I would also say that (looking at the shroud of turin) that people seem to think the nails went through his hands but clearly they went through the wrist...? ...

That there were "nails" (plural) is sufficient to refute the Watchtower's consistent depiction of Jesus being affixed by one nail through both hands above His head.

>Also I think that if he were of the stake the blood would have dripped the same way as it shows on the shroud.

No. If both Jesus' wrists were affixed by one nail above His head to a stake, as claimed by the Watchtower, the bloodflows would have been vertical, i.e. 180 degrees - `south'. Not between 55 and 65 degrees - `northwest' and `northeast. Get a protractor and check.

Stephen

Anonymous said...

Hi again, im not confused about what they believe, to be honest Iv understood that much more than anyother religion, what my problem was, was that I didnt understand what you ment by Jesus is Jehovah and if the witnesses are so silly, why are you using the name they use for God, which is Jehovah and no other religion uses that name?

I suppose you are right with the cross and stake, its not totally clear to me about how he died. But also on the shroud his wrists are over one another and so are his feet? Were his feet nailed aswell? I would have thought the blood would have dripped right off if he were on a cross.
But I suppose no one knows the his body was in the shape of when he was on the cross or stake.

But also iv looked into the cross and apperantly christians took that symbol off another god.
I also found this
"A tradition of the Church which our fathers have inherited, was the adoption of the words "cross" and "crucify." These words are nowhere to be found in the Greek of the New Testament. These words are mistranslations, a "later rendering," of the Greek words stauros and stauroo."

Stephen E. Jones said...

Anonymous

>if the witnesses are so silly, why are you using the name they use for God, which is Jehovah and no other religion uses that name?

As I pointed out Christians have been using the name Jehovah since the 13th century. The King James Version of 1611 translated the Heb YHWH as "Jehovah" at leat 4 times. The American Standard Version of 1901 translated YHWH as "Jehovah" nearly 7,000 times.

What is "silly" is the Watchtower's making a major doctrinal issue out of using the name "Jehovah" when the actual Hebrew name is Yahweh. If they were really concerned about the correct use of God's name, they would rename themselves "Yahweh's Witnesses"!

>I suppose you are right with the cross and stake, its not totally clear to me about how he died.

All the evidence, both Biblical and other points to Jesus having been nailed to a Roman cross. See my (incomplete) series, "Was Jesus executed on a cross or a stake?"

>But also on the shroud his wrists are over one another and so are his feet?

That is how Jesus was laid out in burial, after He was taken down from the cross.

>Were his feet nailed aswell?

Yes, according to the Shroud of Turin, and Early Church writings and the Bible:

Ps 22:16. Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.

Lk 24:39: "Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have."

>I would have thought the blood would have dripped right off if he were on a cross.

No. As I pointed out, the Man on the Shroud's arms were at a 55-60 degree angle and so some of the blood from the nail wounds in His wrists ran down His arms.

>But I suppose no one knows the his body was in the shape of when he was on the cross or stake.

They actually do know and even have a full-size 3D model at Colorado Springs of the Man on the Shroud. His body is bent in rigor mortis as it was on the cross, with the rigor mortis having been broken only for the arms. Two Shroud experts, Bucklin and Zugibe were Medical Examiners. But you have to read Shroud books or Internet articles to discover that.

>But also iv looked into the cross and apperantly christians took that symbol off another god.

No. The evidence is overwhelming that Romans used the cross as an instrument of death by torture for what they deemed to be major crimes from at least the 2nd century BC to the 4th century AD.

>"A tradition of the Church which our fathers have inherited, was the adoption of the words "cross" and "crucify." These words are nowhere to be found in the Greek of the New Testament.

Of course they aren't! They are English translations of the Latin words for cross (crux) and execution on a cross.

>These words are mistranslations, a "later rendering," of the Greek words stauros and stauroo."

No, they are not mistranslations. They are independent Latin equivalents of those Greek words.

Read my series, "Was Jesus executed on a cross or a stake?" I refute the Watchtower's fallacious linguistic arguments early in that series.

Stephen

MeMyselfAndI said...

The Romans took the cross symbol from another God and used it as their own.
So wouldnt it be wrong for people to praise the cross? as they seem to do.
To be honest I think its quite sick that people have symbols of him on the cross, I would definitly not have a knife around my neck if my mother got stabbed!
I know we should NEVER forget what he did for us but there has to be other ways to show are appreciation apart from making statues of Jesus being killed is such a cruel way.

Stephen E. Jones said...

MeMyselfAnd

>The Romans took the cross symbol from another God and used it as their own.

That's not factually true. A cross is a simple, convenient wooden structure to execute a man on, and the Romans took it over from the Persians(see my series, "Was Jesus executed on a cross or a stake?").

Even the Watchtower Society admits that the Romans used a variety of wooden structures (including a crux simplex - a single wooden pole) to execute their enemies on.

But even if it was true, so what? The Romans were pagans and they crucified their victims (including Jesus) using their pagan means of execution.

>So wouldnt it be wrong for people to praise the cross? as they seem to do.

No. Jesus' cross represents God's the victory over paganism by turning its own ultimate symbol of a shameful death against itself.

>To be honest I think its quite sick that people have symbols of him on the cross,

That's because you are not a Christian, i.e. not saved by Jesus' cross. Christians, along with St. Paul, glory in the cross of Christ:

Gal 6:14. "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."

because it is the means by which the world has been crucified to them!

Even the Watchtower's own NWT says that JWs should "boast ... in the torture stake [sic] of our Lord Jesus Christ" (my emphasis):

Gal 1:14 "Never may it occur that I should boast, except in the torture stake of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world has been impaled to me and I to the world."

In fact it says that JWs should boast only in it! But no JW does. Rather they try to downplay the cross (even falsely translating it as "torture stake") as much as possible, like you are doing.

Which is just more evidence that Watchtowerism is a counterfeit of the genuine article, Christianity!

>I would definitly not have a knife around my neck if my mother got stabbed!

False analogy. A knife that stabbed your mother would not have any redeeming features. But the Cross that Jesus was crucified on, is the ultimate redeeming feature.

>I know we should NEVER forget what he did for us

From your comments above this is just lip service and head-knowledge on your part. You clearly do not understand in your heart what Jesus did for you on the cross otherwise you would glory in it, as St Paul did, and other Christians (like me) do.

>but there has to be other ways to show are appreciation apart from making statues of Jesus being killed is such a cruel way.

Bear in mind that it is mainly Roman Catholics who depict Christ's body on the cross, i.e. a crucifix. Protestants like me usually just have a bare cross, to witness to the fact that Jesus did not remain on the cross but arose from the dead and ascended into Heaven.

Stephen

MeMyselfAndI said...

Yes, but the only thing I do not agree with is the statues with him on, it doesnt seem right, okay a blank cross, fine but not with Jesus!
I may not be christian to you but I do believe that there is a god and Jesus died for our sins and alot of other things.
But I think of nicer ways to remember Jesus, as the kind man he was. You might say Yes we only remember the croos because of why he died on it, I know that but I just dont agree with the statues and also iv seen lots of statues with the nails through the palm of his hand? but shows on the shroud that its the wrist?

Also a friend brought the question up that 'Didnt Mary clean Jesus's wounds after he was taken off the cross?' could you tell me if there are any scriptures?
Do you believe the Shroud of Turnin is real? I do because of how amazing it is, that im sure no human could create that back in those days but im trying to find out if they have done anymore tests on the shroud.

Stephen E. Jones said...

MeMyselfAndI

>Also a friend brought the question up that 'Didnt Mary clean Jesus's wounds after he was taken off the cross?' could you tell me if there are any scriptures?

John 19:40 says:

"Taking Jesus' body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs."

This does not mention the women but only two men (Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus).

And Luke 23:53-55:

"Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid. It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. The women who had come with Jesus from Galilee followed Joseph and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it."

indicates there was insufficient time to do the full Jewish burial between the time permission was obtained from the Romans to take Jesus' body down from the cross, extract the nails, carry it to the tomb, and the Jewish sabbath began at sundown. So the women merely noted where the tomb was and how Jesus' body was laid in it.

This is supported by Luke 23:56:

"Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment."

and

Mark 16:1:

"When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body."

where the women had "prepared spices and perfumes" and went to the tomb on Sunday at sunrise, when the sabbath had ended, to complete the full Jewish burial rites.

>Do you believe the Shroud of Turnin is real?

Yes. See my other blog, "The Shroud of Turin."

>I do because of how amazing it is, that im sure no human could create that back in those days

That's a key point. The Shroud has an undisputed history from the 1350s and the Pray Manuscript proves it existed well before the 1190s.

So those who claim the Shroud is a fake have yet to show: 1) how it was faked; 2) by who; 3) in or before the twelfth century; 4) using knowledge (e.g. negative photography; microscopic particles; ultraviolet light; circulation of the blood; etc, etc) that did not exist until hundreds of years later; 5) such that modern science cannot detect or duplicate the fake.

>but im trying to find out if they have done anymore tests on the shroud.

Not as far as I know. But a source close to the Vatican has hinted they may allow more tests on the Shroud in the future:

"Carbon dating in 1988 claimed the image of the man could not be that of Jesus because the shroud was medieval. But many have rejected that result and want further scientific tests to be carried out. Monsignor Giuseppe Ghiberti, president of the Turin archdiocese's commission on the Shroud, says he believes this will happen. He says the Vatican is not against new testing and will probably allow this to occur in phases in order not to do everything at the same time." (Sabina Castelfranco, "Shroud of Turin Again on Display," VOANews, 9 April 2010).

Stephen E. Jones