Jesus was executed on a cross, not a stake! #2: Biblical

Continuing from part #1 Introduction with this part #2 Biblical of

[Above: WB&TS, 1982, "You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth," p.171. Another un-Biblical Watchtower Bible & Tract Society illustration of Jesus on a single-beam stake, with His hands, above His HEAD, affixed by one NAIL through both hands, and the charge against Him posted above His HANDS!]

my new series "Jesus was executed on a cross, not a stake!"

[1. Introduction; 2. Biblical; 3. Linguistic; 4. Historical; 5. Patristic. 6. Archaeological; 7. Pagan; 8. Worship; 9. Conclusion]

2. BIBLICAL
As we shall now see, the Biblical evidence is overwhelming that Jesus was executed on a two-beamed cross, and not on a single-beamed stake with his hands above His head and affixed by one nail through both hands, as consistently depicted in Watchtower illustrations since at least 1958 - over fifty years.

A. According to Mt 27:37 NWT, the charge against Jesus was posted "above his HEAD"
In the Watchtower's own New World Translation, Mt 27:37 reads:

"Also, they posted above his HEAD the charge against him, in writing: `This is Jesus the King of the Jews.'" (my emphasis).

- All Watchtower Society's illustrations of Jesus on a single-beamed stake since at least 1958 show Him with His hands above His head
As far as I am aware, all Watchtower Society illustrations of Jesus on a single-beamed stake show Him with His hands above His head, e.g. "From Paradise Lost to Paradise Regained," 1958, p.141; "Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life," 1995, p.67 and "What Does the Bible Really Teach?," 2005, p.52.

- The Watchtower has stated that Jesus' hands were above His head

"Jesus Christ was killed on an upright stake that had no crosspiece. ... It was this simple stake that Jesus was hanged on with his hands nailed above his head." ("The Cross in Worship," The Watchtower, February 15, 1960, p.127. My emphasis).

"Jesus is now stretched out on the stake with his hands placed above his head. ... Pilate has posted on the stake a sign that reads: `Jesus the Nazarene the King of the Jews.'" (WB&TS, 1991, "The Greatest Man Who Ever Lived," ch. 125. My emphasis).

- But if Jesus' hands were above His head then the charge would be above Jesus' HANDS
But clearly if Jesus was fastened to a single-beamed stake with his arms above his head (as consistently depicted in the Society's publications since at least 1958-see above), then it should read, "they posted above his HANDS the charge against him ..." (my emphasis).

"If Christ had been nailed to an upright stake with his hands above his head as in Watchtower illustrations, Matthew would more likely have said that the written charge was placed above his hands":

"'Matthew also notes, `Above his head they placed the written charge against him.. .' (Matthew 27:37 NIV) If Christ had been nailed to an upright stake with his hands above his head as in Watchtower illustrations, Matthew would more likely have said that the written charge was placed above his hands; since he actually did say `above his head,' this would imply that Jesus' hands were someplace else-at the ends of a crossbeam." (Reed, D.A., 1996, "Answering Jehovah's Witnesses: Subject by Subject," Baker: Grand Rapids MI, Second printing, 1998, pp.86-87).

"If Jesus were impaled on a stake it would be stated that the titilus [charge] was placed above his hands, not his head":

"Matthew 27:37 also supports the idea of a cross rather than a stake when it says; `Above his head they had put the charge against him in writing: 'THIS IS JESUS, KING OF THE JEWS' `. In the picture of the crucifixion the plaque is above Jesus head, whereas in the Watchtower representation it is necessarily above his hands. If Jesus were impaled on a stake it would be stated that the titilus was placed above his hands, not his head." (Grundy, P., "Cross or Stake, "Facts About Jehovah's Witnesses, 18 February 2008. Emphasis original).

- If the charge was above Jesus' head and His hands were above the charge, then the charge would be obscured
"This charge would have been difficult to read if Christ had been crucified on a torture stake as His hands would have obstructed the words":

"In addition to this text [John 20:25], further biblical evidence that Christ was crucified on a cross, rather than a torture stake, can be gleaned from Matthew 27:37, which describes the charge placed `above' Christ's `head': `This is Jesus The King of the Jews'. This charge would have been difficult to read if Christ had been crucified on a torture stake as His hands would have obstructed the words. If it was placed higher up the pole, it may have been easier for the Gospel writer, Matthew, to have written that the charge was placed above His hands. However, the traditional historic view of Christ being crucified on a cross, would both make the charge easier for all to have seen, and, as the text says, been placed above His head." (McCann, V., "Jehovah's Witnesses and the Cross," Spotlight Ministries, 7 November 2005).

Or to put it another way, if the Romans wanted the charge against Jesus to be place prominently above Jesus' head, which is symbolically and most effectively the best place to put it, then they would have chosen a †-shaped Latin cross (crux immissa) with its space immediately above the victim's head.

- The Watchtower has admitted that the Romans used a variety of cross shapes, some with a crossbar, including the traditional crux immissa (†)
The Society has even admitted that such a cross (amongst others) did exist, i.e. "the crux immissa, which was like the letter `T' but with the crossbar lowered":

"The word `cross' stands for a number of shapes. There is the simple upright stake, called in Latin crux simplex; the crux commissa, which was shaped like the letter `T'; the crux decussata, which was shaped like the letter `X,' and the crux immissa, which was like the letter `T' but with the crossbar lowered." ("The Cross Is of Pagan Origin," The Watchtower, February 1, 1968, pp.93-95, p.94).

In its efforts to depict the cross as pagan (but since the Romans were pagan, what else would it be?!) the Society shot itself in the foot by admitting that a cross with a crossbar, the "the tau cross" was used by the ancient "Chaldeans," who were hundreds of years before Christ, and "continued in general use" down to the time of "Constantine [272-337] ... a pagan Roman":

"This linking of the cross with sun worship is not surprising, as that was what the Chaldeans of Mesopotamia did ... Their god Tammuz was associated with the sun ... Although Tammuz was given different names by other peoples his symbol, the tau cross, continued in general use. Since Constantine was a pagan Roman, among whom the cross was a religious symbol, it is significant that he had a vision of this symbol in the sky beneath the sun." ("The Cross in Worship," The Watchtower, February 15, 1960, p.126).

This admission by the WT completely destroys its claim that the Romans used only an upright stake up to the time of Christ, and began to use the stake with a crossbar only after Jesus' death:

"The quotes from the Society posted above only vaguely indicate that `later' the meaning of stauros changed. Thus we find ambiguous statements like: `Later it also came to be used for an execution stake having a crosspiece' (Reasoning From the Scriptures, 1987, p. 89). `...the original meanings of these words [stauros and crux] were later expanded to include the cross' (Watchtower, 15 February 1960, p. 127). But when was this `later'? Many Watchtower publications cite W. E. Vine's lexicon as stating that this occurred `by the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D.' (cf. Truth that Leads to Eternal Life, 1968, pp. 142-143; Awake! , 8 May 1969, p. 4; Reasoning, pp. 90-91; Watchtower, 15 August 1987, p. 22; Insight, Vol. 1, pp. 1191; Watchtower, 1 May 1989, pp. 23-24; see Vine's An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, 1948, Vol. 1, p. 256). Additionally, the 22 March 1987 Awake! (p. 11) published an article by Nicholas Kip which implied that the meaning-shift took place in the days of Emperor Constantine (A.D. 312-337). The impression the Society gives is that stauros referred only to a crux simplex until between AD 250 and 315." (Leolaia, "The facts on crucifixion, stauros, and the `torture stake'," Jehovah's Witnesses Discussion Forum, 11 June, 2005).

In another gaffe, the Watchtower claimed the cross was pagan because it was a phallic symbol (overlooking that an upright stake would be even more so!), but again in the process admitting that "pagan Rome" did use "tau crosses":

'The cross was often associated in ancient times with phallicism, or sex worship. ... Inverted tau crosses have been used as phallic symbols in Greece, Rome and Japan. In pagan Rome the cross was marked on the official garments of the priests and was worn suspended from a necklace by its vestal virgins." ("The Cross in Worship," The Watchtower, February 15, 1960, p.126).

And as we shall see in part #7. Pagan, of this series, it is an irrelevant objection that the cross was pagan, to the question whether Jesus was executed on a cross. Since Jesus was executed by the pagan Romans, whatever method they used was, by definition, pagan!

- That the charge was above Jesus' head shows He was on a CROSS not a stake
"If Jesus had died on a stake, the text would have said, `Above His hands.' But it clearly says, `Above His head,' showing that a cross-crucifixion is meant":

"In keeping with a cross-crucifixion instead of a stake-crucifixion, we read in Matthew 27:37, `Above his head they placed the written charge against him: THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS' (emphasis added). If Jesus had died on a stake, the text would have said, `Above His hands.' But it clearly says, `Above His head,' showing that a cross-crucifixion is meant." (Rhodes, R., 1993, "Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses," Harvest House: Eugene OR, pp.397-398. Emphasis original).

B. According to Jn 20:25 NWT, Jesus had the "print of the NAILS" (plural) in His hands
In the New World Translation at Jn 20:25 NWT, Thomas said:

"Unless I see in his hands the print of the NAILS [plural] and stick my finger into the print of the NAILS [plural] ... I will certainly not believe.'" (my emphasis).

- Since at least 1958 (over fifty years) Watchtower illustrations of Jesus execution all show His hands above His head affixed by a NAIL (singular)
"For years, all the Watchtower Society's publications have depicted Jesus' death in this way-with a single nail pinning his hands to a `torture stake'":

"John 20:25 `Consequently the other disciples would say to him [Thomas]: `We have seen the Lord!' But he said to them: `Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe.' (NWT)' ... That Jesus did not die on a cross is a basic JW doctrine. ... the Watchtower Society teaches that Jesus was nailed to a `torture stake'-an upright pole ... without any cross beam. ... Illustrations of the Lord's death in their books show Jesus with his arms brought together straight above his head, with a single nail pinning both hands to the stake. For years, all the Watchtower Society's publications have depicted Jesus' death in this way-with a single nail pinning his hands to a `torture stake.' But, what does Scripture say? Did one nail fasten Jesus' hands above his head, or did two nails hold his hands to the opposite ends of a cross beam? At John 20:25 ... Even in the Watchtower Bible, Thomas spoke of the `nails' (plural) in Jesus' hands-not a single nail, as in Watchtower illustrations. So, although JW leaders took out the word cross from their Bible, they neglected to take out the second nail in Jesus' hands-thus retaining evidence that he died by crucifixion, rather than the stake-fiction that they teach." (Reed, D.A., 1986, "Jehovah's Witnesses Answered Verse by Verse," Baker: Grand Rapids MI, Thirty-first printing, 2006, pp.82-83. Emphasis original).

"This brings up the most conclusive passage of all, which reveals that Christ was not killed as the WT portrays in their publications. ...Thomas knew there was more than one nail that punctured Jesus' hands":

"This brings up the most conclusive passage of all, which reveals that Christ was not killed as the WT portrays in their publications. The apostle John tells us that Thomas, who was not there when Jesus first appeared to the rest, refused to believe it was actually Jesus (he thought it must have been a spirit, too!). He told the others, `Unless I see in His HANDS the imprint of THE NAILS, and put my finger into the place of THE NAILS, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.' (John 20:25, emphasis added). Note that Thomas knew there was more than one nail that punctured Jesus' hands. Yet, the WT always pictures Jesus as having ONE NAIL through both hands!" (Watters, R., 1996, "Refuting Jehovah's Witnesses," Bethel Ministries: Manhattan Beach CA, Third edition, p.49. Emphasis original).

- So the Watchtower's New World Translation at Jn 20:25 contradicts its own illustrations that Jesus had His hands affixed by a NAIL (singular)
"Even in the Watchtower Bible, Thomas spoke of the `nails' (plural) in Jesus' hands ... their own New World Translation has the plural form of `nails.'":

"To support the view that Jesus died on a cross and not a stake, you might want to ask the Jehovah's Witness to open the New World Translation and read aloud from John 20:25: `Consequently the other disciples would say to him: `We have seen the Lord!' But he [Thomas] said to them: `Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe' (emphasis added). Now, if Jesus was crucified not on a cross but on a stake, then only one nail would have been used for His hands. Our text, however, says that nails were used (one for each hand). This verse is extremely problematic for the Watchtower position-especially since their own New World Translation has the plural form of `nails.'" (Rhodes, 1993, pp.396-397).

- If Jesus had His hands above His head affixed by a single NAIL then it should read "print of the NAIL" (singular)
Again if Jesus was affixed to a stake by only one NAIL [singular] through both his hands, as depicted in Watchtower Society publications since at least 1958, i.e. over fifty years, then Thomas would have said, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the NAIL" (singular) not "NAILS" (plural).

"Note that Thomas knew there was more than one nail that punctured Jesus' hands. Yet, the WBTS always picture Jesus as having one nail through both hands":

"This brings up the most conclusive passage of all which reveals that Christ was not crucified as the Governing Body portray in their publications. The apostle John tells us that Thomas, who was not there when Jesus first appeared to the rest, would not believe it was actually Jesus (he thought it must have been a spirit too!). He told the others: `Unless I see in His HANDS the imprint of THE NAILS, and put my finger in the place of THE NAILS, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe (John 20:25).' Note that Thomas knew there was more than one nail that punctured Jesus' hands. Yet, the WBTS always picture Jesus as having one nail through both hands! When Jesus reappeared for the sake of Thomas, He showed Him His hands so that Thomas could see and believe (John 20:26-27).." (Harris, D. & Browning, B., "Awake to the Watchtower," Reachout Trust: London, Revised, 1993, p.314. Emphasis original).

- Only if Jesus was crucified on a two-beamed cross would there need to be NAILS (plural)-one in each hand
"Thomas said, `Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails ...' ... indicating ... two or more nails such as would be needed to pin his hands to the opposite ends of a crossbeam":

"Which instrument of execution fits the biblical accounts of Christ's death? Thomas said, `Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails...' indicating that there was not just a single nail in Jesus' hands as in Watchtower illustrations, but two or more nails such as would be needed to pin his hands to the opposite ends of a crossbeam. (John 20:25 KJV) ." (Reed, 1996, "Answering Jehovah's Witnesses," pp.86-87).

"That separate nails were in each hand is made clear by the use of the word 'nails' not 'nail'. This suggests that Jesus had his arms separated on a cross, not together on a stake":

"A further indication of whether Jesus died on a cross or a stake can be seen by a comparison ... with what is stated in the Bible ... [and] in the above depiction from the Watchtower publication ... there is only one nail and it goes through the wrist and not the hands, due to it being a stake, not a cross. Compare this to what Thomas stated at John 20:25; `unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe'. Jesus was crucified with two nails, one in each hand, not a single nail through the wrist. That separate nails were in each hand is made clear by the use of the word 'nails' not 'nail'. This suggests that Jesus had his arms separated on a cross, not together on a stake as represented in Watchtower publications. " (Grundy, P., 2008, "Cross or Stake, "Facts About Jehovah's Witnesses, 18 February).

"The Watchtower always portrays Jesus with one nail in His hands. If His hands were above His head, there would be no reason to use two nails":

"John 20:25 states, `So the other disciples were saying to him, `We have seen the Lord!' But he said to them, `Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.' Notice that Thomas mentions that there are `nails' and not a single nail that was placed into the hands of Jesus. The Watchtower always portrays Jesus with one nail in His hands. If His hands were above His head, there would be no reason to use two nails." (Walker, K. & B., 2005, "The Cross," Evidence Ministries).

As we shall see in "6. Archaeological" the Watchtower is now trying to back-pedal from its fifty-plus years of illustrations showing Jesus hanging from a stake by one nail through both His hands. I predict the Society will either stop illustrating Jesus hanging on the stake, period, or it will start showing Him hanging by two nails through His hands. But, apart from two nails through each hand looking unnecessary on a single-beamed stake, and the Society appearing to cave-in to Christian criticism, it would still have the problem of illustrating how both the charge and Jesus' hands could be above His head!

C. Jesus predicted the "sort of death" that Peter would die would be by him having to "stretch out" (Gk. ekteino) his hands (Jn 21:17-19 NWT)
In Jn 21:17-19 NWT, Jesus predicted the "sort of death" that Peter would die would involve him having to, "stretch out ... [his] hands":

"Jesus said to him [Peter]`... when you grow old you will stretch out your hands and another [man] will gird you and bear you where you do not wish. This he said to signify by what sort of death he would glorify God."

- Early church history records that Peter was crucified on a cross
Early church historian Eusebius Pamphilus (c. AD 263-339) recorded that Peter was "crucified':

"Thus Nero publicly announcing himself as the chief enemy of God, was led on in his fury to slaughter the apostles. Paul is therefore said to have been beheaded at Rome, and Peter to have been crucified under him." (Eusebius, "The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus," Cruse, C.F., transl., Baker: Grand Rapids MI, 1955, Fourth printing, 1966, p.80).

"The death of St. Peter [on a cross] is attested to by Tertullian [c.160-220] at the end of the 2nd century, and by Origen [c.185–254]":

"In the epilogue of the Gospel of John, Jesus hints at the death by which Peter would glorify God, [Jn. 21:18–19] saying `…when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and take you where you do not want to go.' This is interpreted by some as a reference to Peter's crucifixion. According to the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia, St. Peter labored in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his life by martyrdom. The death of St. Peter is attested to by Tertullian at the end of the 2nd century, and by Origen in Eusebius, Church History III.1. Origen says: `Peter was crucified at Rome with his head downwards, as he himself had desired to suffer.' This is why an upside down cross is generally accepted as a symbol of Peter, who would not have considered himself worthy enough to die the same way as his Savior." ("Saint Peter: Death," Wikipedia, 24 January 2011).

- The Gk. word for "stretch out" is ekteino, which in Jn 21:18 means "the stretching out of the hands in crucifixion"
The Gk. word for "stretch out" is ekteino which in "Jn. 21:18 ... the variants show that play is made on the stretching out of the hands in crucifixion":

"ekteino [to stretch out] ... In the NT (except in Acts 27:30), the term is always used for stretching out the hand. ... In Jn. 21:18 ... the variants show that play is made on the stretching out of the hands in crucifixion, the point being that Peter will make a final submission of his own will." (Kittel, G. & Friedrich, G., eds, 1985, "Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: Abridged in one Volume," Bromiley, G.W., transl., Eerdmans: Grand Rapids MI, p.219).

"ekteino" means to "stretch out ... Of one who is crucified ... J 21:18":

"ekteino ... stretch out. 1. lit .... stretch itself out ... Of nets spread out ... Ac 27:30 ... hold out or extend the hand(s) ... of a man w. a disabled hand: Mt 12:13; Mk 3:5; Lk 6:10. To grasp someth. ... Mt 26:51; .... To take hold of someone Mt 14:31. To heal someone (by touch ... Mt 8:3; Mk 1:41; Lk 5:13. ... to indicate purpose Ac 4:30. ... To point at someone Mt 12:49. ... Gesture of a speaker Ac 26:1 ... Of one who is crucified (Epict. 3, 26, 22 ekteinas seauton os oi estauromenoi; Jos., Ant. 19, 94) J 21:18; B 12:2." (Bauer, W., Arndt, W.F., Gingrich, F.W. & Danker, F.W., 1979, "A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature," University of Chicago Press: Chicago IL, Second edition, p.245. My transliteration).

"Stretching out the hands is an allusion to the way those to be crucified were forced to stretch out their arms and bear the cross beam to the place of execution":

"[John 21:18-19] Following the reinstatement of Peter, Jesus said to him, I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go. This enigmatic statement contrasts Peter's experience during his youth when he dressed himself and went wherever he pleased, with what was to happen to him when he grew old. His independence would be stripped away. He would be forced to stretch out his hands and others would 'clothe' him and lead him to a place he would not wish to go. Stretching out the hands is an allusion to the way those to be crucified were forced to stretch out their arms and bear the cross beam to the place of execution (cf. Barnabas 12:4; Justin, I Apology, 35). The evangelist leaves us in no doubt about the intention of this saying: Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Peter is known to have suffered a violent death (1 Clement 5:4) by crucifixion (Tertullian, Scorpiace xv.3), and 21:18-19 is the earliest testimony to his martyrdom by this means."(Kruse, C.G., 2003, "The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction and Commentary," Inter-Varsity Press: Leicester UK, pp.392-393. Emphasis original).

- It is the same Gk. word used elsewhere in ancient Greek literature "to refer to refer to men who have been crucified"
" As we saw ... the word ekteneis `you will stretch out' here is the same verb ... used to refer to refer to men who have been crucified":

"John 21:18-19 The last text under consideration is the most ambiguous and does not even refer to Jesus' crucifixion but it is important because it a kind of death or execution involving a `stretching of the hands': ` 'Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you girded yourself and walked where you would; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands (ekteneis tas kheiras sou), and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish to go.' This he said to show by what kind of death ... he was to glorify God. ... As we saw above, the word ekteneis `you will stretch out' here is the same verb that Epictetus used to refer to refer to men who have been crucified ...and Artemidorus ... mentioned that those who will be `crucified' ... have `outstretched hands' (ton kheir on ektasin). ... Since the death being described in John 21:18-19 is that of Apostle Peter, and since Christian tradition otherwise claims that Peter was crucified ... the understated text in John 21:18-19 would appear to refer to crucifixion as involving a `stretching of the hands'." (Leolaia, 2005).

- When Jesus spoke of Peter's future crucifixion, He indicated that Peter's arms would be out-stretched, not up-stretched
"It is also significant that when Jesus spoke of Peter's future crucifixion, He indicated that Peter's arms would be outstretched, not above his head":

"It is also significant that when Jesus spoke of Peter's future crucifixion, He indicated that Peter's arms would be outstretched, not above his head. Jesus told Peter: `'I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.' Now Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God' (John 21:18,19, emphasis added)." (Rhodes, 1993, p.397).

"What did Jesus say about Peter's hands? They were going to be stretched out, not up. By traditional accounts, Peter was crucified on a cross ...":

"John 21:18-19 `Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to gird yourself and walk wherever you wished; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands and someone else will gird you, and bring you where you do not wish to go.' Now this He said, signifying by what kind of death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He said to him, `Follow Me!' Jesus prophesies that Peter will die and even reveals by what means. The inspired narrative in verse nineteen points this out. What did Jesus say about Peter's hands? They were going to be stretched out, not up. By traditional accounts, Peter was crucified on a cross up-side-down." (Walker, K. & B., 2005, "The Cross," Evidence Ministries).

D. Jesus could not have walked to Golgotha "bearing the torture stake for himself" (Jn 19:17 NWT)

"Jn 19:17 NWT. And, bearing the torture stake [Gk. stauros] for himself, he [Jesus] went out to the so-called Skull Place, which is called Gol-go-tha in Hebrew ..."

- There were two parts of a Roman cross (crux commissa or crux immissa), the heavy wooden upright stake (stipes) and the lighter crossbeam (patibulum)
"More frequently there was a crossbeam (patibulum) across the stipes, or upright. It could be fixed to the top of the upright, making the shape of a capital T (crux commissa) ... often it was fixed a third of the way from the top, thus forming the Latin cross (crux immissa)":

"The Romans, who seem to have got hold of the idea of crucifixion from the Phoenicians in the Punic Wars, became expert at this most grisly method of execution. ... There were various ways of doing it. The most basic was to hang the man or impale him on a stake (crux simplex). More frequently there was a crossbeam (patibulum) across the stipes, or upright. It could be fixed to the top of the upright, making the shape of a capital T (crux commissa), and the Christian writers of the second century made considerable play with that fact. More often it was fixed a third of the way from the top, thus forming the Latin cross (crux immissa), and it is widely believed that Jesus was executed on a cross of this shape. ." (Green, E.M.B. , 1984, "The Empty Cross of Jesus," Hodder & Stoughton: London, pp.21-22).

"The Greek and Latin words corresponding to `crucifixion' applied to many different forms of painful execution ... [including] a combination of an upright (in Latin, stipes) and a crossbeam (in Latin, patibulum).

"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). In some cases, the condemned was forced to carry the crossbeam on his shoulders 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). The Roman historian Tacitus records that the city of Rome had a specific place for carrying out executions, situated outside the Esquiline Gate, and had a specific area reserved for the execution of slaves by crucifixion.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." ("Crucifixion: Details," Wikipedia, 20 January 2011).

Note the weight of the stipes alone would be the difference between the "whole cross ... over ... 135 kilograms" and "the crossbeam ... 35-60 kilograms," or between 75 and 100 kg (165 and 220 lbs).

- The Watchtower Society has admitted that there was a "crossbeam of the cross, called the patibulum"
The Watchtower has admitted (albeit only once as far as I am aware) to its JW readers that there was a "crossbeam of the cross, called the patibulum" (but never that the upright or stake was called the stipes):

"Tradition, not the Scriptures, also says that the condemned man carried only the crossbeam of the cross, called the patibulum, or antenna, instead of both parts. In this way some try to avoid the predicament of having too much weight for one man to drag or carry to Golgotha. ... The matter of one man like Simon of Cyrene bearing a torture stake, as the Scriptures say, is perfectly reasonable, for if it was 15 cm (6 in.) in diameter and 3.5 m (11 ft) long, it probably weighed little more than 45 kg (100 lb)." ("Impalement," in "Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 1: Aaron-Jehoshua," Watchtower Bible & Tract Society: Brooklyn NY, 1988, p.1191).

The reason for this all but total `deafening silence" by the Watchtower is probably because, as we shall see in #4. Historical of this series, there is ample evidence before, during, and after the time of Christ, of the Roman cross (L. crux = Gk. stauros) being comprised of both a patibulum and a stipes.

Note also the Watchtower's underestimate of the weight of the "stake" as being "3.5 m (11 ft) long." For an up to 6ft (1.8 m) man to be stretched out on a stake, with his hands fixed above his head (~1 m), and then a charge fixed above his hands (~0.5 m), allowing for his feet not touching the ground (~0.5 m) and the stake being firmly set in the ground (~1 m), it would need a stake of about 4.8 metres, not "3.5 m. ... long"! But then instead of the stake weighing "little more than 45 kg (100 lb)" it would then weigh 4.8/3.5 x 45 = ~62 kgs or ~136 lbs!

- The Roman practice was for the condemned man to carry only the crossbeam (patibulum) to the site of execution
"The horizontal bar of such crosses was called the patibulum, and the slaves to be executed were customarily made to carry the patibulum to the place of execution":

"What the WT specifically ignores is that the Romans DID execute prisoners on crosses--an issue they are careful to sidestep in their presentation. The horizontal bar of such crosses was called the patibulum, and the slaves to be executed were customarily made to carry the patibulum to the place of execution. (Seneca, De Vita Beata 19:3; Epistola 101:12; Tacitus, Historiae, IV, 3) ... " (Watters, R., 1996, "Refuting Jehovah's Witnesses," Bethel Ministries: Manhattan Beach CA, Third edition, p.47. Emphasis original).

"Every rebel condemned to crucifixion was compelled to carry his cross, or at least the patibulum (the cross beam), to the scene of his execution":

"The Romans had made crucifixion a common sight in all their colonized provinces, and Palestine was no exception. Every rebel condemned to crucifixion was compelled to carry his cross, or at least the patibulum (the cross beam), to the scene of his execution. Plutarch wrote that `every criminal condemned to death bears his cross on his back'. [Plutarch, "On the Delays of Divine Vengeance," Moralia, 554 A/B] So John wrote of Jesus that `carrying his own cross, he went out to The Place of the Skull' (19:17)." (Stott, J.R.W., 1986, "The Cross of Christ," Inter-Varsity Press: Leicester UK, p.279).

"John 19:17 ... is the decisive text ... because it is an explicit reference to the Roman practice of patibulum-bearing ... The Latin sources ... more clearly distinguish the patibulum from the cross by having a distinct term for each, are quite explicit that it is the crossbeam that is carried and not the stipes (upright pole)":

"John 19:17 `Jesus was led away, and carrying the cross by himself (bastazon hauto ton stauron), went out to what is called the Place of the Skull'. This is the decisive text, and it is one that is almost never mentioned in discussions on the cross in Watchtower literature. But it is very important because it is an explicit reference to the Roman practice of patibulum-bearing. Note that the verb bastazon `carrying' is the same verb used by Chariton (i.e. `taking up [bastazon] his cross') and Artemidorus to refer to the same thing (i.e. `the man who is to be nailed carries [bastazei] it beforehand'), and Artemidorus was quite explicit that the same victim who carries the stauros would hang from a two-beamed stauros. The Latin sources mentioned earlier, which more clearly distinguish the patibulum from the cross by having a distinct term for each, are quite explicit that it is the crossbeam that is carried and not the stipes (upright pole). In fact, nowhere in ancient sources is a prisoner ever described as dragging a pole without a crosspiece, and such a practice would have nothing to do with the well-attested ancient Roman practice of forcing prisoners or slaves to bear a patibulum while walking through the city or a public area. ... The practice that is instead attested is the carrying of the patibulum across one's shoulders or back, but the Watchtower rules out this scenario a priori by their denial that stauros could refer to a cross with a crossbeam." (Leolaia, 2005).

- At the site of execution the victim was nailed to the crossbar (patibulum) and then the crossbar bearing the nailed or tied victim was attached to the permanent upright stake (stipes)
"The vertical beam already must have been in place, so it was the crossbeam (patibulum) that he carried and was nailed to":

"The ... crucifixion of Christ followed the Roman routine we find recorded elsewhere. ... Victims were put on trial under Roman authorities. When convicted they were beaten and whipped and forced to carry the cross-specifically, a crossbeam. This piece was called in Latin the patibulum. The prisoners were driven through the city streets and out to the place of execution. There they found in place a vertical beam, mounted in the ground. The Latin term stipes designates this beam. The prisoners were stripped, nailed to the crossbeams, and then mounted onto the vertical beams to complete the crucifixion. ... There is no mention of Christ or the soldiers digging a hole and placing into it the single (vertical) beam which he was forced to carry. The vertical beam already must have been in place, so it was the crossbeam (patibulum) that he carried and was nailed to." (Bower, C.F., Jr., "Cross or Torture Stake?," This Rock, Vol. 2, No. 5, October 1991. Emphasis original).

"The condemned man ... had to carry the patibulum of his cross ... his wrists ... nailed to the patibulum and then ... on to the stipes which was already firmly fixed in the ground":

"The condemned man was invariably scourged, and men were known to die under that punishment alone, so severe were the wounds inflicted by this cruel cat-o'-nine-tails inset with pieces of metal. Thereafter, he had to carry the patibulum of his cross, and was led out under armed guard to die. There was a variety of ways of fixing the condemned man on the cross. He might have his wrists tied or nailed to the patibulum and then be hauled by ropes up on to the stipes which was already firmly fixed in the ground. More commonly the cross was put together on the ground, the condemned man bound or nailed to it, and the whole thing then erected and dropped into a pit that had been prepared to receive it." (Green, 1984, "The Empty Cross of Jesus," pp.21-22).

- The execution of Jesus followed this standard Roman pattern of carrying the crossbeam (patibulum) to Golgotha where it was attached to an upright stake (stipes)
"Jesus carried the cross-beam, or patibulum, to Golgotha. There, the patibulum was affixed to an upright stake":

"The Biblical Testimony of the Cross One cannot help but notice the series of events as recorded in Matthew 27:26,31-37, Mark 15:14-26, Luke 23:26-38 and John 19:1-22 (regarding the death of Jesus) and their harmony with the method of crucifixion as described by the articles quoted above. It appears that Jesus carried the cross-beam, or patibulum, to Golgotha. There, the patibulum was affixed to an upright stake, perhaps having a seat or footpiece, and Jesus was nailed on to the whole structure. Above Him was placed the title, JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS." (Harris & Browning, 1993, pp.313-314. Emphasis original).

- Jesus could not have carried a heavy wooden upright stake (stipes), but he could, for a short distance, have carried a cross-beam (patibulum)
Jesus in His weakened state, having been scourged (Mt 27:26; Mk 15:15; Jn 19:1) with a Roman flagrum, i.e. "several thongs fastened to a handle" with "Hard material" (i.e. pieces of sharp metal and bone) "affixed to [those] multiple thongs to give a flesh-tearing 'bite'," could not carry the upright stake (stipes) weighing between 75 and 100 kg (165 and 220 lbs).

Even the Watchtower's underestimate of "little more than 45 kg (100 lb)" (let alone a more realistic ~4.8 metre stake weighing ~62 kgs or ~136 lbs) would be far too heavy for a scourged man, as Jesus was, to carry about 650 metres from Pilate's Antonia fortress to Golgotha.

"After a criminal's condemnation ... He was then made to carry the cross-beam (patibulum) like a slave to the scene of his torture and death ... It was this patibulum, not the whole cross, which Jesus was too weak to carry":

"After a criminal's condemnation, it was the custom for a victim to be scourged with the flagellum, a whip with leather thongs, which in our Lord's case doubtless greatly weakened him and hastened eventual death. He was then made to carry the cross-beam (patibulum) like a slave to the scene of his torture and death, always outside the city, while a herald carried in front of him the `title', the written accusation. It was this patibulum, not the whole cross, which Jesus was too weak to carry, and which was borne by Simon the Cyrenian. The condemned man was stripped naked, laid on the ground with the cross-beam under his shoulders, and his arms or his hands tied or nailed (Jn. 20:25) to it. This cross-bar was then lifted and secured to the upright post, so that the victim's feet, which were then tied or nailed ... ." (Torrance, J.B., "Cross, Crucifixion," in Douglas, J.D., et al., eds., 1982, "New Bible Dictionary," InterVarsity Press, Leicester UK, Second edition, p.253).

"A man could not carry the ... Watchtower's `torture stake' ... But a man could, with great difficulty, carry a crosspiece that he would be nailed to":

"In addition to the above, Scripture indicates that Jesus set out for Calvary `carrying his own cross.' (John 19:17 NIV) A man could not carry the massive cross that illustrations sometimes show Christ nailed to. Nor could a man carry the Watchtower's `torture stake'-any more than a man could carry a telephone pole. But a man could, with great difficulty, carry a crosspiece that he would be nailed to and that would then be hoisted by ropes onto an upright piece that was permanently set in the ground. This, according to scriptural and archaeological evidence, is the sort of instrument on which Christ died." (Reed, 1996, "Answering Jehovah's Witnesses," p.87).

- So the Watchtower is right in claiming that Jesus was executed on a stake (stipes) but wrong in denying that He was nailed to a crossbeam (patibulum), which was then attached to that stake.
"So the Watchtower is right in saying that Jesus was killed on a stake but wrong in denying that there was a crossbeam to which he was nailed and which hung atop this stake":

"During an execution in which a stauros was used, the condemned criminal would carry a crossbeam (known in Latin as the patibulum) to the place where the stake (stipes) had already been erected. He was then tied or nailed to the beam he had carried, which was placed atop the erect pale. The executioners would not have had the criminal carry the beam to the place of execution, only to take it from him, dig a hole for it, and mount him upon it. The vertical stake would already have been planted for the patibulum to be hung upon it. So the Watchtower is right in saying that Jesus was killed on a stake but wrong in denying that there was a crossbeam to which he was nailed and which hung atop this stake. If the New Testament authors wished to convey that Christ died on a torture stake, it is likely that they would have used the Greek word skolops. However, the Biblical writers never use this word to describe the instrument of Christ's death." (Evert, J., 2001, "Answering Jehovah's Witnesses," Catholic Answers: El Cajon CA, pp.99-100).

As we have seen above, the weight of Biblical evidence is overwhelmingly against the Watchtower Society's claim that Jesus was executed on a one-beamed stake, and for Christianity's claim that Jesus was crucified on a two-beamed cross. We could stop right here, because with the Bible against it, the Society's argument that Jesus was executed on a stake, not a cross, is in ruins.

And as we shall see in the remainder of this series, there is also overwhelming evidence: linguistic, historical, patristic, and archaeological, that Jesus was executed on a two-beamed cross, not on a one-beamed stake!

Ccontinued in part #3 Linguistic.

Stephen E. Jones.
My other blogs: CreationEvolutionDesign & The Shroud of Turin