Proudly, Even Lovingly Wearing Symbols Of Death/Murder

i]reply to post by faceoff85

Another thing of interest is to research the historical accurasy of the doctrine that jesus died on a cross... when reviewing the original hebrew and greek texts, one would have to come to the conclusion that it is by no means a certain fact that Jesus died on a cross... instead it would be much more likely that he died on a straight pole.

Came across this about the crucifix or also known as a gibbet

en.wikipedia.org...

Cross shape

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0591e2ea03cd.jpg[/atsimg]Crux simplex, a simple wooden stake. Image by Justus Lipsius

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8b9d7c16f288.jpg[/atsimg]
The crucifixion of Jesus. Image by Justus Lipsius

The gibbet on which crucifixion was carried out could be of many shapes. Josephus describes multiple tortures and positions of crucifixion during the Siege of Jerusalem as Titus crucified the rebels; and Seneca the Younger recounts: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet."

At times the gibbet was only one vertical stake, called in Latin crux simplex or palus, or in Greek μόνος σταυρός (monos stauros, i.e. isolated stake). This was the simplest available construction for torturing and killing the criminals. Frequently, however, there was a cross-piece attached either at the top to give the shape of a T (crux commissa) or just below the top, as in the form most familiar in Christian symbolism (crux immissa). Other forms were in the shape of the letters X and Y.

The first writings about the crucifixion of Jesus do not speak specifically about the shape of that cross, but all the early writings that do, from about the year 100 on, describe it as shaped like the letter T (the Greek letter tau) or as composed of an upright and a transverse beam, sometimes with a small ledge in the upright.

Nail placement
In popular depictions of the crucifixion of Jesus (possibly because in translations of John 20:25 the wounds are described as being "in his hands"), Jesus is shown with nails in his hands. But in Greek the word "χείρ", usually translated as "hand", referred to arm and hand together, and to denote the hand as distinct from the arm some other word was added, as "ἄκρην οὔτασε χεῖρα" (he wounded the end of the χείρ, i.e., he wounded her hand).

A possibility that does not require tying is that the nails were inserted just above the wrist, between the two bones of the forearm (the radius and the ulna).

An experiment that was the subject of a documentary on the National Geographic Channel's Quest For Truth: The Crucifixion, showed that a person can be suspended by the palm of the hand. Nailing the feet to the side of the cross relieves strain on the wrists by placing most of the weight on the lower body.

Another possibility, suggested by Frederick Zugibe, is that the nails may have been driven in at an angle, entering in the palm in the crease that delineates the bulky region at the base of the thumb, and exiting in the wrist, passing through the carpal tunnel.

A foot-rest (suppedaneum) attached to the cross, perhaps for the purpose of taking the person's weight off the wrists, is sometimes included in representations of the crucifixion of Jesus, but is not discussed in ancient sources. Some scholars interpret the Alexamenos graffito, the earliest surviving depiction of the Crucifixion, as including such a foot-rest. Ancient sources do mention the sedile, a small seat attached to the front of the cross, about halfway down, which could have served a similar purpose.

In 1968, archaeologists discovered at Giv'at ha-Mivtar in northeast Jerusalem the remains of one Jehohanan, who had been crucified in the first century. The remains included a heel bone with a nail driven through it from the side. The tip of the nail was bent, perhaps because of striking a knot in the upright beam, which prevented it being extracted from the foot. A first inaccurate account of the length of the nail led some to believe that it had been driven through both heels, suggesting that the man had been placed in a sort of sidesaddle position, but the true length of the nail, 11.5 centimetres (4.53 inches), suggests instead that in this case of crucifixion the heels were nailed to opposite sides of the upright.

Also

en.wikipedia.org...

Writers hold different views on the form of the gibbet used in the execution of Jesus, the central figure of Christianity, and differ about the meaning of the Greek word "stauros" (σταυρός) which was used in the New Testament books to refer to it. Tradition and historical and textual evidence suggest it was in the form of a Latin cross (†).

Easton's Bible Dictionary lists the forms in which such gibbets are represented:

1. The crux simplex (I), a "single piece without transom".
2. The crux decussata (X), or St. Andrew's cross
3. The crux commissa (T), or St. Anthony's cross
4. The crux immissa (†), or Latin cross

More a each site.

reply to post by rubbertramp
Interesting & valid point.

reply to post by tonypazzo

the cross has nothing to do with death. in fact, it most closely resembles the egyptian ankh. these symbols go back to the dawn of man. the cross is to resemble 2 sticks crossed with when rub create fire, stolen from the gods by prometheus and delivered unto man to give him knowledge.

Thank you I never realised its link to the Egyptian "Anhk" .

www.newadvent.org...
Anhk

Another symbol which has been connected with the cross is the ansated cross (ankh or crux ansata) of the ancient Egyptians, wrongly called the "ansated key of the Nile". It often appears as a symbolic sign in the hands of the goddess Sekhet. From the earliest times also it appears among the hieroglyphic signs symbolic of life or of the living, and was transliterated into Greek as Anse (Ansa). But the meaning of this sign is very obscure (Da Morgan, Recherches sur les origines de l'Egypte, 1896-98); perhaps it was originally, like the swastika, an astronomical sign. The ansated cross is found on many and various monuments of Egypt (Prisse d'Avennes, L'art Egyptien, 404). In later times the Egyptian Christians (Copts), attracted by its form, and perhaps by its symbolism, adopted it as the emblem of the cross (Gayet, "Les monuments coptes du Musée de Boulaq" in "Mémoires de le mission française du Caire", VIII, fasc. III, 1889, p. 18, pl. XXXI-XXXII and LXX-LXXI)

the cross can also be indicative of the crossing of nerves in the lower part of the spinal column. read Manly P. Hall to learn more about the allegory used to describe the human spinal chord in religion.

About the thread's tittle, we had, in Québec, a group of humorist in the 80's that made a sketch about the impact of Jesus on peoples lives.

At one point, there was an "interview" with an "inmate", and he said; "We wear the Cross because that is how Jesus died. If He had lived today, we would be wearing a hanging rope, or an electric chair..."

It was so funny, but at the same time, so bizarrely true.

(Edit) That'll teach me to answer something before finishing to read the OP... Sorry...

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Aresh Troxit]

so you know what the roman soildier said the the guy being crucified-
would you mind crossing your feet- i only got one nail left..

The cross was supposed to symbolize the great sacrifice of christ. To some people it is an idol, a sort of amulet that they must apply on everything or themselves at all times.

The "cross" though has another symbology, as the Tau Grand Cross.

reply to post by faceoff85


Original sin is a guilt trip, laid on the human race by a cult of necromancers. Nothing more.

The fact that it is so widely believed to be "true" is nothing, really. Human beings will believe anything, if you abuse them enough.

As to the OP: I have never worn a cross and never will, precisely for the reasons you laid out. Bill Hicks was dead on.

Originally posted by tonypazzo
the cross can also be indicative of the crossing of nerves in the lower part of the spinal column. read Manly P. Hall to learn more about the allegory used to describe the human spinal chord in religion.

Similar encoding, as there are 33 vertebrae in the spine. Correlating to the 33 degrees in masonry. The ladder leading to consciousness, the brain

reply to post by 0zzymand0s

Original sin is a guilt trip, laid on the human race by a cult of necromancers. Nothing more.

Please enlighten, would like to know more about this please.

Originally posted by 0zzymand0s
reply to post by faceoff85

 

Original sin is a guilt trip, laid on the human race by a cult of necromancers. Nothing more.

The fact that it is so widely believed to be "true" is nothing, really. Human beings will believe anything, if you abuse them enough.

As to the OP: I have never worn a cross and never will, precisely for the reasons you laid out. Bill Hicks was dead on.

I believe the POV you present here is only possible when accepting evolution-theory as true. in that sence "sin" is merely an opinion. I believe because of the simple fact that you do not believe in a deity, you are ill-equiped for this discussion as one needs to believe in a divine creator holding us accountable for "sins" to be able to partake indebt into this subject of the cross and what it stands for.

No offence meant, Simply pointing out that your POV deviates from the subject presented by OP

@ OP

Thnx for looking up the details surrounding the words stauros and crux.

One thing those sites fail to mention though is the case of those legs broken of the criminals hanging on either side of Jesus. Why was it neccasary for those romans to break the legs of those 2? what purpose did it serve?

John 19:31-33 (New International Version - UK)

31 Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down.

32 The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other.

33 But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.

This establishes that the breaking of the legs hastened the dying proces. it was evident that the 2 criminals were alive and kicking before their legs were broken. somehow breaking their legs prevented those criminals from postponing death...

Again I invite people to test this concept at home. without using your legs, try hanging from whatever by your hands. try doing this while keeping your hands apart just like the depiction of jesus hanging from a cross, then put your hands as close as posible and while holding on relax your upperbody. What killed people hanging from a pole (and what justifies the breaking of legs to hasten death) was in fact the chestmuscles constricting one's airways...



[edit on 13/7/2010 by faceoff85]

Originally posted by depth om

Originally posted by tonypazzo
the cross can also be indicative of the crossing of nerves in the lower part of the spinal column. read Manly P. Hall to learn more about the allegory used to describe the human spinal chord in religion.

Similar encoding, as there are 33 vertebrae in the spine. Correlating to the 33 degrees in masonry. The ladder leading to consciousness, the brain

yes, and Jesus Christ was 33 at the time of his "death". illuminated men who were taught the mysteries of life were required to spend 3 days "underground" in the darkness, from which they were "born again" into the light of the illuminated.

reply to post by tonypazzo


please understand, i mean no disrespect by this.
but, you state his age with absolute certainty. is it safe to believe that this is based stricktly on biblical text?
can i ask for a better description of what you state as fact?
is there any other text that you know of which claims the same?
roman possibly?
just wondering, very interesting thread.



[edit on 13-7-2010 by rubbertramp]

Other uses for the CROSS besides the supossed tool wich was used for Jesus death are in the worship of the Greek god Bacchus, the Tyrus god Tammuz, Chaldew god Bel and the Norwegian god Odin.

The earliest known use was actually for the god Tammuz. from there on the use of the cross as a holy symbol expanded to egypt and other surrounding country's. all in all it is quite evident that the cross was used in lots of different faith's. even Christianity started using it about 100 years AD. it truly is an allround symbol

all of the people you mentioned were based on the same "regenerative deity", based on the sun, who dies and is reborn. jesus is based on this same archtype. When Tammuz died he was said to be rejoined with his father in the spirit of the sun. The basic teaching of mystery schools is that we are aspects of the sun and when we die we return our little light to the sun in heaven whic his a physical representation of the metaphysical god.

Originally posted by tonypazzo
all of the people you mentioned were based on the same "regenerative deity", based on the sun, who dies and is reborn. jesus is based on this same archtype. When Tammuz died he was said to be rejoined with his father in the spirit of the sun. The basic teaching of mystery schools is that we are aspects of the sun and when we die we return our little light to the sun in heaven whic his a physical representation of the metaphysical god.

some info about the use of the cross

These crosses were used as a symbol of the Babylonian sun god, and were first seen on a coin stamped for Julius Caesar, 100-44 BC. And then on a coin that was stamped for Caesar's successor (in August) in 20 BC. On the coins of Constantine the cross is the most common symbol, but the same symbol is used without the surrounding circle, and with four equal arms vertical and horizontal way, and this was the symbol that was worshipped as the "sunwheel". The Commission would also indicate that Constantine was a sun worshiper, and he wasn't a member of the "Church" until about 25 years after, according to legend, he first witnessed a cross "- The Companion Bible, Appendix No. 162; see also The Non-Christian Cross, p. 133-141.

You are right when mentioning the origin of the cross being in babylon. This, however, shows even more how important it would be for christians to NOT accept the cross as a holy symbol. Babylon was known for its great diversity of deity's and religions. thats why it didn't carry gods aproval.

Another interesting note is the fact that this same Constantine was solely responsible for the acceptance of the "trinity" doctrine.. comforting hey?


[edit on 13/7/2010 by faceoff85]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the Cross is a pagan tradition that the Catholic church put into there symbolism. The Cross is actually a t for Tammuz.

It has nothing to do with Christ or the Bible, it' an old trick to get you to worship Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz.

Just like the pictures of supposed Mary holding baby Jesus is actually Semiramis and Tammuz and have nothing to do with the scriptures. Illuminati worship these things.

Nimrod and friends are in the Bible on the "do not worship list"
Also the worship of the Virgin mother is actually worshiping Semiramis Queen of Heven who tradition also goes back to the worship of Diana who is also in the Bible (Acts).

Your not suppose to worship neither Christ as a baby nor as dying a horrible death, neither does the scripture talk about worshiping Mary.

Also Mary in the Bible isn't wasn't a virgin, the Greek word where is says virgin just means marriageable woman, it clearly states multiple times Christ came from the bloodline of David through his fathers seed.

Also if people actually read the Bible they would know Christ had 4 brothers and 2 sisters. 2 brothers in the truth with him the rest were not in the truth.


Christmas is also the celebration of Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz.

reply to post by Wise Man


bing bing we have a winner. but try telling that to a properly brainwashed "christian". they're reponse will be borderline violent. scary, huh?

Originally posted by Wise Man
I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the Cross is a pagan tradition that the Catholic church put into there symbolism. The Cross is actually a t for Tammuz.

It has nothing to do with Christ or the Bible, it' an old trick to get you to worship Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz.

Just like the pictures of supposed Mary holding baby Jesus is actually Semiramis and Tammuz and have nothing to do with the scriptures. Illuminati worship these things.

Nimrod and friends are in the Bible on the "do not worship list"
Also the worship of the Virgin mother is actually worshiping Semiramis Queen of Heven who tradition also goes back to the worship of Diana who is also in the Bible (Acts).

Your not suppose to worship neither Christ as a baby nor as dying a horrible death, neither does the scripture talk about worshiping Mary.

Also Mary in the Bible isn't wasn't a virgin, the Greek word where is says virgin just means marriageable woman, it clearly states multiple times Christ came from the bloodline of David through his fathers seed.

Also if people actually read the Bible they would know Christ had 4 brothers and 2 sisters. 2 brothers in the truth with him the rest were not in the truth.


Christmas is also the celebration of Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz.

You're quite right on most things excpet the fat part. altough celebrating Jesus birth is not supossed to be celebrated (and for sure it shouldn't be december 25th/26th) Jesus DID command us to celebrate his death in memorial.

Luke 22:19 (New International Version - UK)

19 And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.

"The lord's supper" its called

[edit on 13/7/2010 by faceoff85]

Originally posted by faceoff85
Jesus DID command us to celebrate his death in memorial.

Luke 22:19 (New International Version - UK)

19 And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.

"The lord's supper" its called

[edit on 13/7/2010 by faceoff85]

It is agreed by virtually all biblical scholars that the depiction of the Lords supper is an apologetic insertion from the evangelists.

Jesus commanded the Jews one thing (and he WAS sent ONLY to the Jews): "Hear oh Israel, the Lord OUR God, the Lord is ONE."

NOWHERE in the Bible did Jesus command anyone to worship HIM.