Jesus predicted his own crucifiction?

For those undecided

Whereas most Christians believe the gibbet on which Jesus was executed was the traditional two-beamed cross, debate exists regarding the view that a single upright stake was used. The Greek and Latin words used in the earliest Christian writings are ambiguous. The Koine Greek terms used in the New Testament are stauros (σταυρός) and xylon (ξύλον). The latter means wood (a live tree, timber or an object constructed of wood); in earlier forms of Greek, the former term meant an upright stake or pole, but in Koine Greek it was used also to mean a cross.[131] The Latin word crux was also applied to objects other than a cross.[132] However, early Christians writers who speak of the shape of the particular gibbet on which Jesus died invariably describe it as having a cross-beam. For instance, the Epistle of Barnabas, which was certainly earlier than 135,[133] and may have been of the 1st century AD,[134] the time when the gospel accounts of the death of Jesus were written, likened it to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300),[135] and to the position assumed by Moses in Exodus 17:11–12.[136] Justin Martyr (100–165) explicitly says the cross of Christ was of two-beam shape: "That lamb which was commanded to be wholly roasted was a symbol of the suffering of the cross which Christ would undergo. For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb."[137] Irenaeus, who died around the end of the 2nd century, speaks of the cross as having "five extremities, two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails."[138] For other witnesses to how early Christians envisaged the shape of the gibbet used for Jesus, see Dispute about Jesus' execution method.

reply to post by TiedDestructor


Im rather reluctant to continue this offtopicness...

none the less... IF a cross beam was used, it would have been mentioned in the gospels...

It wasn't... not even a hint of a cross beam being used exists in those texts

Furthermore, as I've previously stated, Christianity routinely borrows from pagan myth and symbolism, so theres no reason not to assume the "cross" was anything less then that...

Theres no mention of a cross in the gospels, only a stake... and again, we have evidence of a stake being used... NOT a cross

Again, see the crucified man's heel...

cojs.org...

This shows evidence his of a man whos feet were nailed to the sides of a "stake"... not the traditional cross where the feet were nailed together...

That's all I have to say...

I agree hence the words I put in bold.

I was in no way responding to you.

reply to post by TiedDestructor


my mistake...

and my apologies

Akragon
reply to post by TiedDestructor

 

my mistake...

and my apologies

Did Jesus predict his own death or does this mean that these passages were written after the fact?

-MM

Option 2, almost certainly. It's common knowledge they were all written a long time after..

reply to post by MerkabaMeditation


Jesus according to the gospels predicted his death many more times than just once. And in much clearer terms than your cited scripture. I could spend about an hour citing all the verses -- they are extremely numerous.

Jesus knew of his death - He even prayed that God find another way if possible because He knew it would entail a great deal of torture and suffering.

With the cross argument - the "T" formation with a foothold) would have kept a person alive longer, thereby extending their agony. A regular stake would not have the upper supports nor a foothold and the person would die faster. Knowing how long it took Jesus to die would likely end that argument.

If He would have been hung by His arms alone He would have suffocated - I believe this was shown by forensic scientists on a show I watched (can't remember the name of the program). His arms would have given out holding the body up and the lungs would not be able to sustain air without support for as long as He survived.

Jesus knew what would be the outcome of his life here on earth. that's why He was here.

no christian doubts that.

how could He not know? lol.

doesn't one usually get TIED to a stake and burned?

Dianec
Jesus knew of his death - He even prayed that God find another way of possible because He knew it would entail a great deal of torture and suffering.

With the cross argument - the "T" formation with a foothold) would have kept a person alive longer, thereby extending their agony. A regular stake would not have the upper supports nor a foothold and the person would die faster. Knowing how long it took Jesus to die would likely end that argument.

It took around 6 hours iirc. It started at 9:00 am and ended at 3:00.

Just a tid bit from above...

Irenaeus, who died around the end of the 2nd century, speaks of the cross as having "five extremities, two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails.

reply to post by TiedDestructor


Thanks for that information as it brings back more of that program I watched. He could not have survived hanging by His arms only - I remember that part clearly. The 6 hours confirms it. He also would have needed a foothold - I also recall that. They were going to break His knees to have it be done but found He was dead and did not need to break them. There would have been no need for this had there not been a support but had He not been dead the breaking of the knees would have made his lungs collapse in a very short period of time.

Akragon
reply to post by MerkabaMeditation

 

The word is "Stake" not cross... and that was the way the romans executed people in that day

IF he knew he was to die, he could likely assume he would be hung on a stake...

The Pharisee's were buddy buddy with the romans...

I think the assumption he made was obvious

What?
The Pharisees were buddy buddy with the Romans....evidence please

You talk to fast, the Pharisees hated the Romans, just slightly less than Jesus

borntowatch

Akragon
reply to post by MerkabaMeditation

 

The word is "Stake" not cross... and that was the way the romans executed people in that day

IF he knew he was to die, he could likely assume he would be hung on a stake...

The Pharisee's were buddy buddy with the romans...

I think the assumption he made was obvious

What?
The Pharisees were buddy buddy with the Romans....evidence please

You talk to fast, the Pharisees hated the Romans, just slightly less than Jesus

... and the People's Front of Judea!

Oh, and the Popular People's Front!

Splitters.

reply to post by Akragon

none the less... IF a cross beam was used, it would have been mentioned in the gospels...

It wasn't... not even a hint of a cross beam being used exists in those texts

Why would such a mundane detail be expected (required, apparently,) to be included by the authors of the Gospels? There are tons of details about Jesus' life that aren't included, because they're not relevant to the story, and the shape, size, weight, colour, wood and a myriad of other details about the cross would be lumped in as not being relevant.

He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

sure he knew,it was written in the o.t. too