See other Religion Articles
Title: Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 18, 2007
Author: Bible
Post Date: 2007-10-18 13:09:07 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 2641
Comments: 195
I find it curious that so many people have so much faith in men. And, in what men say, and this is esp. true when what the men says flys directly in the face of what they claim to represent/say. I hold to this firmly; A man is known by his actions, and not by his words. And this leads me directly to what is wrong with America; the churches. And specifically those churches which claim to be Christian churches. And to the men who serve in those churches, and who know that they lie. After all, such men do, supposedly, read the Bible. Well, they have at least one time in their lives I think it is fair to assume. More than that? Pretty doubtful actually. So this brings me to the question I posed in the title of this post; Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross? The only acceptable answer to this comes from the Bible. I assume that everyone who claims to be Christian will agree with this. My first Bible (that I read extensively) was The King James Study Bible. I have continued to use it, although I have more than a dozen different Bibles now. In the King James; Galatians 3:13; Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, CURSED is EVERYONE THAT HANGETH ON A TREE. Second witness; "...for it is written ... " ; Deutronomy 22:22; And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him from a tree; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shall in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) ... Now, this may come as a surprise to many of you, but a tree ain't a cross; it is a post. In the Spanish translation of the King James, it is clearer, for they use the term madero, which means board, or, post. In addition, if you have read anything about the Roman Empire, one of the notable facts about the Romans was their efficiency in killing people. And it is not efficient to use two pieces of wood, i.e., a cross, when a single piece of wood, a post, will suffice. And, in fact, this is how the Romans did hang those who they wished to make examples out of; on a post. (Yeah, yeah, I know; all the movies use crosses. And, your point is?) There is another point that must be made here; when a man is hung on a post, or, for that matter, if he were to be hung on a cross, with nails, YOU CAN NOT DRIVE THE NAILS THROUGH THE PALMS OF HIS HAND. It will not work, because when the post/cross is lifted up and dropped into the hole prepared for it, the nails will rip out of the hands and the man will drop to the ground. The Romans knew this from, I am sure, experience, and the nails were ALWAYS driven into the wrists of the victim, between the two bones of the arm. This is the only location which offers enough strength to be usuable is such a manner. The best depiction of Jesus being executed that I have seen is contained in the Watchtower book; What Does The Bible Really Teach? on page 52. What does this mean: If you are attending a so-called Christian church, which uses the cross as a part of their worship, and protrays Jesus on that cross with nails through the palms of his hand, then you are participating in a deliberate lie. And, you are in a church properly described in Revelations a one of the daughters of the whore of Babylon. (I paraphrase; not going to look it up today.) Now, let's look at a couple of other Bibles and see what is said; New American Standard Bible; Galatians 3:13; Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us -- for it is writte, "CUESED IS EVERY ONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE" -- Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, (23) his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), ... Pretty good. Not far off, but.... let's take a quick look at another Bible. Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text (George M. Lamsa's Translation from the Aramaic of the Peshitta); Galatians 3:13; Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming accursed for our sakes (for it is writtenm Crused is everyone who hangs on a cross). OOPS! WOW! Boy, do we need that second witness now! Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if any man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is crucified on a tree, and thus put to death; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree but you shall bury him the same day (for he who shall revile God shall be crucified), ... Gotta a problem here, because the second witness does not confirm what was written in Galatians. That means that there is an error in this Bible, and brings into question any quotes taken from it, unless they be confirmed by a second witness. And this problem probably stems from the translator wanting to believe what he had been taught about the cross. And rather than translate directly, he transposed his beliefs into the translation. I am a Christian; I freely and happily and contentedly proclaim this to be true. Chritianity is NOT a religion; it is a way of life, attempting to follow in the footsteps of The Christ. As a Christian, I have a responsibility to study His Word, that I not be lead into error. I accept that responsibility. I also accept the responsibility to help others to learn as well, that any errors that I or they hold may be revealed and corrected jointly. I have stated this before; I ask for correction in anything that I am in error on. And I have been corrected, and I thank those who help me to learn, and, (this is a big one!) change. I hope you find this post helpful, and that it helps to bring all of us to a wider understanding of what is being, deliberately, done to America, through what is supposed to be His church (people). Next post, in a day or so; Is Jesus Christ God?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 151.
#9. To: richard9151 (#0)
Jesus is a fictional character like Hercules and the Bible is nothing but a collection of sun-worship allegories and folklore. Jesus is the personification of the sun, or the sun anthropomorphized. He's the sun of god, the light of the world, who has risen. Christianity has its roots in the worship of the heavens. This is why Christians believe that when they die they will go to "heaven" with God's sun.
Where do you get that non-sense? Where does it teach, in the Bible, that Christians are to go to some heaven? And if you can not point out specifically where, in the Bible, this is taught, then you should not speak of that which you have no knowledge of. Do not confuse the mainstream daughters (so-called churches) of the whore of Babylon (Roman Catholic church) as Christian churches just cause they say that they are; a man is known by his works, and not by his words.
I get my information from reading. Where do you get yours from, the Bible? Where does it teach, in the Bible, that Christians are to go to some heaven? The Bible says, "Our Father who art in heaven," and, "No one gets to the Father except through Him." That's probably where Christians get the idea about Heaven and how to get there. The idea of ascending to "Heaven" is a ubiquitous notion in ancient religions predating Christianity by thousands of years. The pyramids in Egypt were built to facilitate the ascension of pharaohs into "Heaven" to join Horus, who was the son of Amen-Ra. The way to the Father was through the Son.
If you ever do nearly as much reading as I do/have done, then you can mention it. Not until. I started with the Bible long after I read hundreds of books. Found out it was the only place with the information I needed. As to the above; The Bible says, "Our Father who art in heaven," and, "No one gets to the Father except through Him." The first is a prayer, and the second has nothing to do with going to heaven, so what is your point? The last part you got at least partly correct, but you did not go to the correct source, which is Babylon. If you want to understand more, start with the book, The Two Babylons. Then, do a net search for December 25th and the son of god Nimrod Istar. There are several more parts of this as well. The point being that Nimrod is the god mentioned in this search and in most of the religions that follow Babylon, only under different names.
I started with the Bible long after I read hundreds of books. Found out it was the only place with the information I needed. You found out it was the only place with information you needed? How did you find this out? Was it through the power of the holy spirit? The first is a prayer, and the second has nothing to do with going to heaven, so what is your point? You asked me where the Bible says that Christians are going to Heaven. I showed you. What difference does it make what context it's in? Christians believe in Heaven and that they're going there. I've never met a Christian who didn't believe that. Either they read it somewhere or somebody told them. In either case, they blindly believed it. ...you did not go to the correct source, which is Babylon. You need to go further back. Sun mythology and the worship of the heavens predates Babylon and Nimrod.
What difference does it make what context it's in? It makes all the difference in the world!!! What you quoted from the Bible does NOT say that Christians are going to Heaven - even if they falsely use these verses as a basis for their beliefs. Your attitude of taking Scripture "out of context not mattering" is exactly HOW they came to their erroneous beliefs in the first place. Now you've hit the nail squarely on the head... Also read my reply to PR - #54
Archaeologists unveil ancient church in Israel What's that on the floor? It looks like two fish to me.
okaaay....been suspicious of that "church" since I saw it last night. closing some windows, but am going to "park" them here until I can study them further.... started with a search "merovee fish" [don't ask me why, 'cause i don't know why] THE SIX~POINTED STAR THE MARK OF THE BEAST PART II HISTORY OF THE SIX-POINTED STAR [fish, merovee, Dagon, etc.] =================== The Roman Eagle (aquila) [Roman eagle, German eagle, Maccabes, Dan, snake, Habsburgs, Charlemagne, ODIN, Gauls, Franks, Celts [***isn't that a celtic knot in that mosaic?], Greeks, German "Kaiser", Russian "Tsar", USA re Roman Empire, etc.] www.chinahistoryforum.com...ion/index.php/t15405.html =========================== **** THE FALSE GOSPEL IN THE STARS PREPARING THE WAY OF THE ANTICHRIST . . .and the False Prophet and 10 kings downsized to 7 and. . . PISCES THE TWO FISHES "....THE TWIN MESSIAHS Gnostics claim to venerate Jesus and John the Baptist as the ‘twin messiahs.’ As Jesus was the “Christ” for the Age of Pisces, John, the Gnostic Christ, will incarnate another messiah for the Age of Aquarius. This is the reason all Grand Masters of the Prieuré de Sion take the name of John (Jean). The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail disclosed that for some time there has been in existence an esoteric papacy as well as the exoteric papacy of the Roman Catholic Church:...." "....Students of Scripture may recognize Oannes as the Philistine god, Dagon, but may not realize that this fish-god is also the ‘beast that rises out of the sea,’ in Rev. 13:1. Dagobert’s Revenge identifies Oannes as ‘Lucifer’ whose fallen angels sired a race of giants, the Nephilim, in Genesis 6: “...Dagon or Oannes, a half-human, half-fish combination who was known as the ‘Lord of the Flood’...was said to rise out of the sea every day to teach his secret knowledge to those who followed him. He is mentioned in Samuel, Chapter 5, when the Philistines capture the Ark of the Covenant and place it in the Temple of Dagon. Two nights later, ‘Dagon was fallen upon is face to the ground before the Ark of the Lord; and the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him.’ It is this character upon which Satan or Lucifer is based, but the physical description attributed to him applied to an entire race of ‘gods’, or as they were described in the Bible, Nephilim, or Fallen Angels, the ‘Great Old Ones’...” “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose… There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” Gen. 6:1-4 Oannes was the same fish-god described in Bloodline of the Holy Grail as the ‘mysterious sea-beast’ which sired Merovee, the Frankish king who founded the Merovingian dynasty. For this reason, **** the Merovingian dynasty were designated “Fisher Kings.” “Despite the carefully listed genealogies of his time, the heritage of Meroveus was strangely obscured in the monastic annals. Although the rightful son of Clodion, he was nonetheless said by the historian Priscus to have been sired by an arcane sea creature, the Bistea Neptunis.. “The Sicambrian Franks, from whose female line the Merovingians emerged were associated with Grecian Arcadia before migrating to the Rhineland. As we have seen, they called themselves the Newmage – ‘People of the New Covenant’, just as the Essenes of Qumran had once been known. It was the Arcadian legacy that was responsible for the mysterious sea beast – the Bistea Neptunis – as symbolically defined in the Merovingian ancestry. The relevant sea-lord was King Pallas, a god of old Arcadia... The immortal sea-lord was said to be ‘ever-incarnate in a dynasty of ancient kings’ whose symbol was a fish – as was the traditional symbol of Jesus.” (pp.166,175) “And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy...and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.” Rev. 13:1-2 In his blasphemous book, The Real Meaning of the Zodiac, D. James Kennedy stated: “In Pisces these fishes are a representation of the Church.” Fred Gettings associated the fish emblem with the so-called “Christian zodiac,” which the Neo-Platonists based on the pagan Zodiac. “In the Christian zodiac, as in the pagan zodiac, the two fishes of Pisces appear to be associated with the idea of the spirit and soul... Whether this Neoplatonic notion did influence the symbolism of Pisces or not, the spiritual nature of the fishes was adapted by the medieval image-makers as relating very distinctly to the spiritual nature of Christ. In any case, from the earliest times, Christ had been linked with the image of the fish. The drawings of fish in the catacombs were symbols for Christ, and a whole battery of more or less esoteric interpretation was erected to account for this symbolism. A sample of this esotericism, derived from a Sibylline prophecy, is set out in the notes on Augustine's acrostical treatment of the fish...” (911:28-9) Christians have been badly misinformed that the fish symbol represents Christ and His followers because they are “fishers of men.” This pagan emblem, which derives from the pagan zodiac, found its way into the Catholic Church via St. Augustine, a Neo-Platonist. Augustine attempted to justify the adoption of elements of pagan worship in the Church's syncretism, thereby Christianizing pagan practices, emblems and even pagan deities. Augustine wrote concerning the fish: “If you combine the initial letters of the five Greek words, which are Iesous Chreistos Theou Uios Soter, Jesus Christ the Son of God the Saviour, they make the word ichthus, meaning fish, and the mystic meaning of this noun is Christ, because He had power to exist alive, that is, without sin, in the bottomless pit of our mortal life, as in the depths of the sea.” In The Two Babylons, Alexander Hislop stated that Jesus Christ “began to be popularly called ICHTHYS (or ICHTHUS), that is 'the Fish', manifestly to identify Him with Dagon...[and] that Icthus, or the Fish, was one of the names of Bacchus.” Dagon was the Philistine Fish-deity and Bacchus was the Greek name for Tammuz, the Babylonian Sun-god. Making an artistic representation of the fish for religious reasons is forbidden in the Book of Deuteronomy. “Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.” (Deut. 4:15-19)...." www.watch.pair.com/pisces.html also: THE LOST TRIBE OF DAN: "Fish merovingian" and www.watch.pair.com/dan.html#3c1
There are no replies to Comment # 151. End Trace Mode for Comment # 151.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#16. To: Alan Chapman (#9)
Christianity has its roots in the worship of the heavens.
#23. To: richard9151 (#16)
#36. To: Alan Chapman (#23)
I get my information from reading. Where do you get yours from, the Bible?
#48. To: richard9151 (#36)
#60. To: Alan Chapman (#48)
You asked me where the Bible says that Christians are going to Heaven. I showed you. What difference does it make what context it's in?
Christians believe in Heaven and that they're going there. I've never met a Christian who didn't believe that. Either they read it somewhere or somebody told them. In either case, they blindly believed it.
#80. To: innieway (#60)
#151. To: Alan Chapman (#80)
Replies to Comment # 151.