Little Evidence Jesus Died on a Cross, Says Scholar

[3331 137]

(June 27) -- The crucifix is the defining symbol of Christianity, a constant reminder to the faithful of the sacrifice and suffering endured by Jesus Christ for humanity. But an extensive study of ancient texts by a Swedish pastor and academic has revealed that Jesus may not have died on a cross, but instead been put to death on another gruesome execution device.

Gunnar Samuelsson -- a theologian at the University of Gothenburg and author of a 400-page thesis on crucifixion in antiquity -- doesn't doubt that Jesus died on Calvary hill. But he argues that the New Testament is in fact far more ambiguous about the exact method of the Messiah's execution than many Christians are aware.

"When the Gospels refer to the death of Jesus, they just say that he was forced to carry a "stauros" out to Calvary," he told AOL News. Many scholars have interpreted that ancient Greek noun as meaning "cross," and the verb derived from it, "anastauroun," as implying crucifixion. But during his three-and-a-half-year study of texts from around 800 BC to the end of the first century AD, Samuelsson realized the words had more than one defined meaning.

Christophe Simon, This iconic image of Christ dying on the cross may be misleading, according to theologian Gunnar Samuelsson, who says crucifixion was more rare than commonly thought.

"'Stauros' is actually used to describe a lot of different poles and execution devices," he says. "So the device described in the Gospels could have been a cross, but it could also have been a spiked pole, or a tree trunk, or something entirely different." In turn, "anastauroun" was used to signify everything from the act of "raising hands to suspending a musical instrument."

The manner in which Jesus died is further thrown into question by Samuelsson's discovery that crucifixion may have been an unusual form of punishment in the Roman Empire. Descriptions of crucifixions contained in the thousands of Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin and Greek manuscripts he examined most commonly referred to dead prisoners being placed on some form of suspension device, or living captives skewered on stakes. The first century Roman philosopher Seneca the Younger, for example, wrote about seeing a great many prisoners of war on "crosses" after one campaign. But the scribe then describes how a large number of the dead had been impaled.

"If you search for ancient texts that specifically mention the act of crucifixion [as we understand it today]" he says, "you will end up with only two or three examples."

That revelation stands in stark contrast to claims that appear in many books on the historical Jesus, as well as more general surveys of life under Roman rule, which state that prisoners were routinely nailed to crosses. (The Encylopaedia Britannica, for example, says crucifixion was an "important method of capital punishment" in Rome.)

Of course, this lack of hard evidence doesn't mean that the Roman Empire was a crucifix-free zone. Samuelsson suspects that crucifixion was simply one of a great many methods of execution employed across the empire. He notes that Flavius Josephus -- a Jewish historian and adviser to three Roman emperors in the 1st century -- recorded how Roman soldiers were allowed to use their "wicked minds in various ways to execute" prisoners captured during a Jewish uprising. This suggests that the method of Jesus' execution may have been decided by legionnaires stationed at Calvary, and not by the state.

"If we put this on the table, and think that the execution of Jesus was the result of the wicked mind of the soldiers at that very point, we can't know how he could have been executed," Samuelsson says. "The executions of that day could have taken a completely different form from ones the day before."

The Swedish scholar isn't sure exactly why the crucifix went on to become the dominant Christian motif. But this symbol only seems to have become fixed in followers' minds long after Jesus' death, as the first T and X shaped crucifixes appear in Christian manuscripts around the 2nd century AD.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Samuelsson's thesis has caused something of an unheavenly row. While fellow theologians have complimented his highly detailed research, many critics in the blogosphere have claimed that he wants to undermine Christianity. Samuelsson -- who believes that "the man who walked this earth was the Son of God, and that he will return to judge the living and the dead" -- says this accusation is simply "stupid."

"I'm really just a boring, conservative pastor and I start everyday reading the New Testament," he says. "But my suggestion is that we should read the text as it is, not as we think it is."

I Jumped with the guys who invented Skydiving.

[captain1976 0]

"I'm really just a boring, conservative pastor and I start everyday reading the New Testament," he says. "But my suggestion is that we should read the text as it is, not as we think it is."

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

"I'm really just a boring, conservative pastor and I start everyday reading the New Testament," he says. "But my suggestion is that we should read the text as it is, not as we think it is."

Jerry, Which New Testament are you referring to? The market-place is being glutted with new books which are being represented as versions of the Bible.

Each one claims to be the very word of God, yet there are literally thousands of differences between them.

Protestant translators sometimes did not have access to all of the Received Greek Official Text of the King James version, they sometimes put words into their translations based upon the Latin which were never there in the original Greek.

There are a shitload of wrongly translated versus, omissions of important teachings like reincarnation, and inclusions of myths like “Hell”. These exclusions were designed to keep the masses in order.

[captain1976 0]

For hundreds of years bad translations have been made of bad translations that were made from bad translations.......
With that in mind, how could anyone possibly know the exact content of the original writings?

Exactly, but I like the ones that include reincarnation and no hell

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[skyrider 0]

But , "Jesus on a Stick" will never sale!

[maadmax 0]

More silliness, besides the fact that the Bible mentions Jesus' death on the cross in many passages: Matt 27:32, Matt 27:40 & 42, Mark 15:21 & 30, Luke 23:26, John 19:17,19, 25, & 31 etc. The real significance of the cross is that Jesus died for the sins of the world and by believing in Him we can have a personal relationship with God and spend eternity with Him, starting right now.

[3331 137]

Are you serious ?

Who ever this Jesus is he never died for my sin's.

I'm a recovering Catholic from Boston---been through detox and rehab.

I Jumped with the guys who invented Skydiving.

[diablopilot 2]

Wow, they've got you brainwashed. Can't even consider another point of view, eh?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

More silliness, besides the fact that the Bible mentions Jesus' death on the cross in many passages: Matt 27:32, Matt 27:40 & 42, Mark 15:21 & 30, Luke 23:26, John 19:17,19, 25, & 31 etc. The real significance of the cross is that Jesus died for the sins of the world and by believing in Him we can have a personal relationship with God and spend eternity with Him, starting right now.

Sure, go ahead and use passages from a poorly transcribed and intentionally misinterpreted book as proof of its own accuracy.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[pirana 0]

"Jesus died for somebody's sins but not mine."

"My sins they only belong to me."

- Patti Smith

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[beowulf 1]

There is very little evidence Jesus existed, much less was crucified or whatever!!

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Quote

More silliness, besides the fact that the Bible mentions Jesus' death on the cross in many passages: Matt 27:32, Matt 27:40 & 42, Mark 15:21 & 30, Luke 23:26, John 19:17,19, 25, & 31 etc. The real significance of the cross is that Jesus died for the sins of the world and by believing in Him we can have a personal relationship with God and spend eternity with Him, starting right now.

Sure, go ahead and use passages from a poorly transcribed and intentionally misinterpreted book as proof of its own accuracy.

Or go and study the original ancient texts.

And find out how poorly transcribed and misinterpreted (intentionally or otherwise) the modern stuff really is.

Not to mention how selectively editied - to the point of supressing whole versions of the story as heritcal

Kinda like the professor in the OP did

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Niki1 2]

For hundreds of years bad translations have been made of bad translations that were made from bad translations.......
With that in mind, how could anyone possibly know the exact content of the original writings?

[maadmax 0]

Quote

Are you serious ?

Who ever this Jesus is he never died for my sin's.

I'm a recovering Catholic from Boston---been through detox and rehab.

Serious as a heart attack. The evils inflicted on one by another does not negate the promises of God.


...

[riddler 0]

Interesting that even the Stigmata (scars that Jesus bore on wrists and ankles) appear to be a fabrication. The only mention of the method of death is in John (19:34), where he states that Jesus was pierced in the side by a lance. So it's possible, according to the actual text of the bible, that Jesus was not put on a cross at all.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[maadmax 0]

Quote

Interesting that even the Stigmata (scars that Jesus bore on wrists and ankles) appear to be a fabrication. The only mention of the method of death is in John (19:34), where he states that Jesus was pierced in the side by a lance. So it's possible, according to the actual text of the bible, that Jesus was not put on a cross at all.

Check out these passages, Phil2:16, Luke 23:46, Mark 15:37, Matt 27:50 , that is of course if you really want to know what the Bible say about Jesus' death on the cross.

[skyrider 0]

Quote

Quote

Interesting that even the Stigmata (scars that Jesus bore on wrists and ankles) appear to be a fabrication. The only mention of the method of death is in John (19:34), where he states that Jesus was pierced in the side by a lance. So it's possible, according to the actual text of the bible, that Jesus was not put on a cross at all.

Check out these passages, Phil2:16, Luke 23:46, Mark 15:37, Matt 27:50 , that is of course if you really want to know what the Bible say about Jesus' death on the cross.

Words written by who knows, that have been translated many times, they pretty much have lost the original purpose!

If you read th eOP, yuou willl see the interpritation of the original language is where the discripency comes from!

[billvon 3,118]

>> So it's possible, according to the actual text of the bible, that Jesus
>> was not put on a cross at all.


Philippians 2:16: "Holding fast the word of life, so that I may rejoice in the day of Christ that I have not run in vain or labored in vain."

Luke 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried out with a loud voice, He said, “Father, ‘into Your hands I commit My spirit.’”Having said this, He breathed His last."

Mark 15:37: "And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last."

Matthew 27:50: "And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit."

Looks like your quotes support the idea that there is no evidence of a cross.

[Coreece 190]

Nice try...but very sloppy.

Why did you leave out the rest of riddlers post in your reply?

There have been numerous passages listed in this thread that give reference to the cross.

Don't act like you didn't get the point...we know you're smarter than that.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[billvon 3,118]

>Why did you leave out the rest of riddlers post in your reply?

Because I was answering maadmax, not riddler. Max listed four passages from the Bible as proof of "what the Bible say about Jesus' death on the cross."

None of those passages say anything about a cross.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

None of those passages say anything about a cross.

I think his point to riddler was about when Jesus died on the cross.

He already gave passages in his respone to the OP that do say something about a cross.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[skyrider 0]

Quote

Quote

None of those passages say anything about a cross.

I think his point to riddler was about when Jesus died on the cross.

He already gave passages in his respone to the OP that do say something about a cross.

Once again, the point of the OP, is that the bible was misinterpreted!

[futuredivot 0]

Quote

Wow, they've got you brainwashed. Can't even consider another point of view, eh?

Surely I'm not the only one that sees the hilarity of this statement.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[Andy9o8 2]

Assuming he existed, and assuming he was executed by the Romans for his activities, what possible difference could the actual method of his execution make, except as an historical factoid?

[3331 137]

At the time this Jesus supposedly lived the Jews spoke ancient Aramaic and ancient Hebrew, both lost languages until recently. All that was translated into ancient Greek and from there into every known language on this planet with the translators own writers license.

The Roman records from that time show Pontius Pilate having many Jews beaten up and executed with the Sanhedrin as their Court Appointed Attorney.

I Jumped with the guys who invented Skydiving.