The Image of the Cross is wrong, it was X shaped and just above the height of a man.

The government of the antichrist is different. It is a government of grace twisted. Things that shouldn't be allowed are allowed and things that should be allowed are not. What is good is outlawed and what is bad is called good, and is painted as gentle, and kind, and loving, and generous; but in reality, it is evil.

Now we respect another human being for that, that they are our neighbors. We also ought to love our enemies. As well, we do not judge lest we be judged. But also, we are to judge matters of this world, because the children of God will be judging angels at the Judgement. Now, very simple rules were given to us. There are two sets of commandments that the Father gave to us through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. The first set : 1) Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and soul. 2) Love your neighbor as yourself. But there is a second set also given to us by the Holy Spirit, specifically to the gentiles, whom we all are that are in Him now, and these are specific in that they regard the desires of the flesh: 1) Abstain from eating blood. 2) Abstain from eating food sacrificed to idols (not because those foods have any power, but for the sake of those that sacrificed to the idol, and for the sake of your brothers and sisters that they do not stumble) 3) Abstain from eating the meat of animals that were strangled. 4) Do not commit fornication, or sexual impurity.

So, you see, our commandments are easy, actually. But these are our commandments. The Holy Spirit did not see fit to extend grace beyond these commandments. Now, there may be extraneous situations wherein it might appear that these commandments were broken, but they were not actually. But for those people that live a life against these commandments, then need not be able to see into their hearts because their actions speak for them; they are not yet right. Now some may be ignorant of what they do, but if they become aware, and they become aware of the commandment, and if they are able, then they need to do.

But now actually, at the same time, these commandments are even maybe too much of a burden for some today, for our people today have been made so incredibly weak in the flesh that it defies all reality that we even stand on our feet, if we are even lucky enough to have our feet underneath us.

That being said, each situation has its own answer. And the people that are in each individual situation know who is being honest and know who is lying. For the liar knows they are lying and the honest person knows every single person that is lying because of their understanding of the truth.

But this government now, this government of the antichrist, seeks to weaken those with wisdom and judgment. The means by which the spirit of the antichrist attempts to accomplish this impossible task is by creating blanket laws that seem to secure and protect the "weak and needy" (the twisting of grace), or the "hard-working and powerful" (the twisting of grace in the name of pride), in an effort to punish all, for whatever reason, whether extraneous or not, into an oblivion wherein they can no longer get a job, support a family, be part of an organization, get a home, or even an apartment; basically, the government of the antichrist wants to make sure that the laws put the innocent into our prisons and release the unrepentant guilty.

This will create the "perfect world" the antichrist seeks to create. And people are falling for the trap because people are falling into the trap of grace twisted.

There are many ways in which the works of the Lord relate to the workings of this current world. When I saw that people were worried over what the shape of the cross was, and that was going to be their basis for the destruction of the reality of the law, I knew that people had become ignorant enough for that to have effect. Therefore I saw fit to educate those that did not know. As well, I wanted to respond to jiggerj, because their understanding of the law and grace is very limited, and yet, perfectly represents the majority consensus in this world concerning Jesus Christ. The logic seems like wise logic, but in reality, is not logic at all (because logic cannot be applied, neither an equation can be balanced, where there are variables missing from the statement or problem).

I have exposed what is correct and what is not, utterly, and nearly in completion, with the exception of a further explanation regarding the twisting of grace today.

reply to post by jiggerj


You are manipulating. You know that many will refuse to read the full explanation, so you repeat your lie, masked in a question. Clever, but futile; you can't fool the wise and the seekers.

If you had not repeated yourself and instead had addressed my direct answers to the "questions" which you had posed, then we might have a real discussion.

Enjoy talking to yourself, if that is what you like.

Who are you to call wrong a silly image that one may innocently find in their spirit as a reminder to what they should keep in mind?

reply to post by TarzanBeta


Who am I? I am a father that never wants his kids to mix brutal slaughter with the idea of love. I am a concerned citizen of the world that doesn't want the children of today to romanticize and glorify death.

Christians love to say that Jesus died for our sins; what a great hero, huh? So, if you have children let me ask you this: Would you rather have a son that died a hero at 18 in a war, or a coward that lives 90 years and has a wife and babies that will carry on your seed?

Originally posted by jiggerj

But technically, Jesus never died. The flesh died for a few days, but the Spirit of God cannot die. But the flesh of Jesus Christ had committed no sin. Death could not hold onto Jesus in the flesh because death legally had no authority over that flesh. That sacrifice satisfied the law, and then returned because that flesh WAS the law. For whatever has obeyed the law has the authority of the law. Further, the Son IS the law. So therefore, the Law lived inside the flesh which became the law. So therefore, the Spirit of God and the flesh were perfectly married.

Honestly, if you said this to a psychiatrist he would label you as a Disorganized Schizophrenic.

You identify to closely with your house. You are not your house, but you dwell within your house.

But I know those that identify with their house. But the house burns up. It is not preserved.

Now a house can be knocked down, burnt down, or whatever, and it can be rebuilt.

But until your house becomes as eternal as you, there is no sense identifying yourself with the house within which you dwell; but only it is a place for you to be so that you might function.

The job of a psychiatrist is no different than the job of a carpenter. Their job is to make money. A carpenter could build me a house, but a psychiatrist could only rip mine apart. Which deserves the pay?

Originally posted by jiggerj

Who are you to call wrong a silly image that one may innocently find in their spirit as a reminder to what they should keep in mind?

reply to post by TarzanBeta

 

Who am I? I am a father that never wants his kids to mix brutal slaughter with the idea of love. I am a concerned citizen of the world that doesn't want the children of today to romanticize and glorify death.

Christians love to say that Jesus died for our sins; what a great hero, huh? So, if you have children let me ask you this: Would you rather have a son that died a hero at 18 in a war, or a coward that lives 90 years and has a wife and babies that will carry on your seed?

Hero, easy.

The flesh is destined to die anyway. It's not all about just you. It's about everybody. And you're crystal clear. It's not about your kids. It's about you. If it were about your kids, you would care more about letting them be great instead of making them cowards, which pass on your seed of cowardliness, which is eventually replaced by a line of greatness.

With your logic, if you believe in the Almighty, your seed is pointless. But if you do not believe in the Almighty, you will have seed, but they will become pointless anyway.

What are you thinking?

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
reply to post by jiggerj

 

You are manipulating. You know that many will refuse to read the full explanation, so you repeat your lie, masked in a question. Clever, but futile; you can't fool the wise and the seekers.

If you had not repeated yourself and instead had addressed my direct answers to the "questions" which you had posed, then we might have a real discussion.

Enjoy talking to yourself, if that is what you like.

Sadly, that is always the expected response.

reply to post by TarzanBeta

Hero, easy.

That is so sick. Even from a religious standpoint you have forgotten your mantra: And the meek shall inherit the earth.

The image of an EMPTY Cross is wrong, in the rite of Exorcism a crucifix is used. Satan runs from the corpus on the Cross, Our Lord and Savior crucified. It is the greatest act of all time, shouldn't we be reminded every day, every hour?

Originally posted by Shiloh7
reply to post by hounddoghowlie

 

Nothing to do with Christian bashing more to do with fact.

The expert from the Museum was an Israeli archaelogist who knows his country and told us that this is the only evidence of a crucified body that exists so far .

The crucifixation took place where they have no tall trees and what we have is a traditional idea, he showed fact. Crucifixation was supposed to shame a person by their nakedness and to spreadeagle them was far less 'modest' than the T cross shape. It also depends upon where a person was crucified as to the local wood they used to make crosses with.

Nothing to do with Christian bashing more to do with fact

who's facts, theirs , you do realize that the Jewish people don't believe Jesus was the Messiah.
so any thing that is ran or said and has any to do with their account's of Jesus should be viewed as suspect.
you should look at other sources to see if their account holds water and macthes thing that are known.

it has also been rumored that the IAA and the Israeli Museum, just like the Smithsonian, with hold and hide artifacts and information they don't want to be released to the public.

again another example of how big olive trees can get.

The olive tree, Olea europaea, is an evergreen tree or shrub native to the Mediterranean, Asia and Africa. It is short and squat, and rarely exceeds 8–15 metres (26–49 ft) in height.

Olive

you do realize how tall 26 to 49 feet is don't you.

also many places in the bible, you can read where ceder and cypress from lebeon was imported to Israel.they also more than likely imported other timber besides these two. i have seen no evidence, that this was ever stopped during roman rule of the area, on the contrary, during roman rule i would wager that importation increased, and salvage from demolishing of other buildings was done. they just didn't build everything or all of the building out of stone.
if you think about it King Herod who died about four year after Jesus's birth, was on a building spree during his rule.
like i said they used wood to build the temple so what makes you think that, they didn't have any wood to build or do other things with. you can read accounts that Josephus wrote of King Herod palace and the wood used in it.

i also would wager that they just didn't use ceder and cypress, i would think they imported pine also.

so to further support my position that it was a cross made out of a olive tree or a olive tree it's self i give you the account of the excavation, and examination of the only known remains of a Crucifixion Victim, found to date.
i haven't quite figured out who wrote this, there are several names i think it was these guys, that did the original investigation. Vassilios Tzaferis, and . Prof. Nicu Haas, an anthropologist at the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem, then further down some other guys found a few different things they got wrong,
and all of this is in a book by this man i think.Hershel Shanks

the bone fragments are from 21ce, if we go by the date of Jesus birth as 00 then this was just twelve years before Jesus was crucified. i think it is safe to say that the methods of doing things back then didn't move as fast as they do now so it is likely that they did it the same way for a long time.

here are a couple of quotes.

The most dramatic evidence that this young man was crucified was the nail which penetrated his heel bones. But for this nail, we might never have discovered that the young man had died in this way. The nail was preserved only because it hit a hard knot when it was pounded into the olive wood upright of the cross. The olive wood knot was so hard that, as the blows on the nail became heavier, the end of the nail bent and curled. We found a bit of the olive wood (between 1 and 2 cm) on the tip of the nail. This wood had probably been forced out of the knot where the curled nail hooked into it.

the new findings.

One can reasonably assume that the scarcity of wood may have been expressed in the economics of crucifixion in that the crossbar as well as the upright would be used repeatedly. Thus the lack of traumatic injury to the forearm and metacarpals of the hand seems to suggest that the arms of the condemned were tied rather than nailed to the cross. There is ample literary and artistic evidence for the use of ropes rather than nails to secure the condemned to the cross.

According to Zias and Sekeles, the victim's legs straddled the vertical shaft of the cross, one leg on either side, with the nails penetrating the heel bones. The plaque or plate under the head of the nail, they say, was intended to secure the nail and prevent the condemned man from pulling his feet free.

the above from here.
Crucifixion Bone Fragment, 21 CE

We are talking about the same evidence. The little sarcophus the skeleton was in was named and is now in the Museum. It even has a piece of wood still attached.

The olive trees in and near Jerusalem at that time did not grow that big due to a lack of waterl and were not of the strength and length to hold the body of a man.

There is no conspiracy here, it is that this is the only real evidence of an actual crucifixation and a cross shaped in an X was used. It is fanciful to put any other idea forward. The sarcophus was a carved stone box with the name of the individual on it, so he was not some poor guy but someone well heeled and - well boxed, we can assume his crime may have been political, it may not, what we do know is that he was not stoned to death by the Jews.

Cedar from the Lebanon and imported wood would only have been used for the very best houses and palaces, not for criminals. The Lebanese Cedar was an extremely sought after wood and very expensive, it was used in the Temple so would certainly not have been used in crucifixations, however important the victim was.

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by TarzanBeta

 

Hero, easy.

That is so sick. Even from a religious standpoint you have forgotten your mantra: And the meek shall inherit the earth.

Meek doesn't mean weak and cowardly There is a huge difference.

Originally posted by colbe
The image of an EMPTY Cross is wrong, in the rite of Exorcism a crucifix is used. Satan runs from the corpus on the Cross, Our Lord and Savior crucified. It is the greatest act of all time, shouldn't we be reminded every day, every hour?

Who are you to call an image right or wrong? Images are always wrong. It is the purpose of the image that defines whether it has any use at all. We should not require an image at all to cause us to be spiritual beings; for an image is of the flesh. Satan is not afraid of an image. How silly. Satan is afraid of the Lord, and the Lord is alive; He is not a graven image on a piece of metal or plastic, and Satan is not so foolish as to be afraid of that image.

The apostles needed not an image to cast out demons from people. They barely even needed to say, "Go." as Jesus did. The power of God in them was enough to demand submission of the angels to the children of God.

You shouldn't have to be reminded everyday of the Lord; for the Lord is ever-present, you need not any reminder of the Lord. The Lord is there and if you are aware, you realize that your very life represents the life of God and Jesus Christ. When you wake up, you know, "The Lord is here." When you go to sleep, in your dreams, you know, "The Lord is here."

For where can the Lord NOT be?

Now there are some who have the reminders of a THING within themselves. That their flesh is weak, and their eyes stray, or their hands stray, whatever it is. And the silly symbol halts the flesh. That is why it is something to not demean.

Whoever has told you that a piece of metal or plastic is used to cast out demons, they have you fooled horribly.

Originally posted by Shiloh7
We are talking about the same evidence. The little sarcophus the skeleton was in was named and is now in the Museum. It even has a piece of wood still attached.

The olive trees in and near Jerusalem at that time did not grow that big due to a lack of waterl and were not of the strength and length to hold the body of a man.

There is no conspiracy here, it is that this is the only real evidence of an actual crucifixation and a cross shaped in an X was used. It is fanciful to put any other idea forward. The sarcophus was a carved stone box with the name of the individual on it, so he was not some poor guy but someone well heeled and - well boxed, we can assume his crime may have been political, it may not, what we do know is that he was not stoned to death by the Jews.

Cedar from the Lebanon and imported wood would only have been used for the very best houses and palaces, not for criminals. The Lebanese Cedar was an extremely sought after wood and very expensive, it was used in the Temple so would certainly not have been used in crucifixations, however important the victim was.

i don't know how you got some of the things you posted here from my post, but take how ever you want.
and if you paid real close attention, i have from my very first post said it was wood from a olive tree or the tree it's self. the importation of the ceder was used as a example that there was wood there that could of been used.
i never said that it was used as the cross.

that being said, then explain the olive wood found on the nail, there were two types wood found on the nail. olive wood and the piece that was placed between the nail head and the feet was either acacia or pistacia wood.

did you even read the in report from Joseph Zias, an anthropologist,and Eliezer Sekeles,said. in the findings they did after the original examination by Nicu Haas. they reported that.

According to Zias and Sekeles,the victim's legs straddled the vertical shaft of the cross, one leg on either side, with the nails penetrating the heel bones.The plaque or plate under the head of the nail, they say, was intended to secure the nail and prevent the condemned man from pulling his feet free.

as far as i know or have found these are the only two studies that have been published or done. if any others are, then they have not been published. if other studies have been done and different finding made there should have been something published.

look i'm done debating with you over this, i have shown ample evidence that the cross was made from olive wood or the tree it's self, and that the shape was a cross or a t.

yet you still want to take the words of a television show on a network that has repeatably aired shows that have denied the divinity of Jesus, and has even aired shows that denied Jesus ever lived. and that main focus is entertainment and not serious study.

if the claim of the expert is real there should be something published. please provide them and not story about what you saw on television.

show me cold hard written verified facts that the olive trees were not big enough or strong enough to to hold the body of a man that probably weighed no more 200 pounds, due to the lack of water.
you do realize that in order for that to happen, the trees would have had to go through a extensive drought.and that olive trees can live to be hundreds of years old. there is even evidence that in the garden now there is at least one tree that is a thousand years old. do a search you'll find it.

not only that, if there was a lack of water or reduced water supply, the crops in the area would have suffered, causing a food shortage and famine. i have never and can find no reference of that happening until around 70 ad. plus there also seems to be no reference to a olive oil shortage, which would have happened if the trees didn't get enough water, to produce olives.

not only that, the people who run museum the have a stake in the fact that the more they can put out that the life and depictions of how Jesus lived and died are false. bolster the fact that some Jewish people do not believe and claim him not to be the Messiah.

they are so afraid that the truth will come out that they found it necessary to have it put in the Obituary of Nicu Haas, that the man found was not Jesus. a claim no one has ever made i might add.

Nicu Haas, Anthropologist, Dies


ETA:
thought i would post this.

The olive tree, Olea europaea, is very hardy: drought-, disease- and fire-resistant, it can live to a great age. Its root system is robust and capable of regenerating the tree even if the above-ground structure is destroyed. The older the olive tree, the broader and more gnarled the trunk becomes. Many olive trees in the groves around the Mediterranean are said to be hundreds of years old, while an age of 2,000 years is claimed for a number of individual trees; in some cases, this has been scientifically verified

form the wiki
Olive

just further evidence that cross was probably made from the olive wood and that the lack of water never caused the problem that they say.

also just thought to add that olive wood is a hardwood, which means that it is strong in compression, tension and shear(strong along and across the grains).

you do understand the differences in hardwoods and soft don't you.

reply to post by Shiloh7


The greek word "stauros" means "stake, pole, trunk, straight wooden plank".

Neither the "cross" as preceived by traditional christianity or the "X" as mentioned in the OP are "stauros" in Greek.

There are seperate greek words which translate to "cross" and "X" and they are not the word recorded in scripture over a dozen times.

According to the Word of God (Bible) Jesus Christ died on a pole. A single piece of wood in the upright position. 1 nine inch nail through both wrists high above his head, and 1 nine inch nail through both ankles at the bottom.

In a crucifiction as described in scripture you are meant to die from suffication, neither the "T" or "X" crosses allow for this means of death, only the "pole" fulfills this means of death. What made Christ unique is that he HAD to die as the Passover Lamb, which meant he had to die by his blood spilling rather than suffication in order to fulfill the prophecies, also "no bone can be broken". This is why the soldier pierced Christ in his side spilling his blood to the Earth, so that He was dead by the time the soldiers were going around breaking everyone's legs so they could no longer hold themselves up (accelerating the speed of suffication).

Both the "T" and "X" shapes have a pagan root that predates Jesus, neither are a true representation of the mechanism which killed Jesus: the Stauros in Greek... a pole/stake.

God Bless,

The cross is really a T a symbol for the god Tammuz a sun god who's birth day is DEC 25. Nimrod was reborn as Tammuz. The evergreen tree(Tammuz tree) was take down and decorated it during this time. T for Tammuz the symbol for being reborn the Egyptian Ankh a symbol of life. So people being nailed on a X, I could see that and plus it sounds simpler to make than the big cross. They nailed multiple people to these things so the X sounds more plausible.

If you think that "t" shaped crucifixion is not possible you don't have to go back too far in time to see visual proof.

Below is a photo link to the 1915 Armenian Crucifixions (graphic):



Don't know if anyone mentioned this:

Origin of EXCRUCIATE Latin excruciatus, past participle of excruciare, from ex- + cruciare to crucify, from cruc-, crux cross
First Known Use: circa 1570

www.merriam-webster.com...

reply to post by Shiloh7


The last letter of the Hebrew alphabet is Taw (what we know as a "T", they arranged their alphabet in a different way). Back then Taw looked like a X and the meaning for Taw was "Cross" or "Mark" [1].

reply to post by ElohimJD


Thank you I hadn't made the connection with the Passover Lamb and blood being spilt.

I had wondered if a single stake had been used because of hearing about the hands being placed above the head and the feet pierced through the ankle bones as the feet bones would not have taken the weight of a man trying to lift himself up. Yet again its a different image from the traditional Crucifixion which many Christians would probably be shocked by.

Text What was fascinating is that the image of the cross world-wide is wrong he said. Simply because the nails go through each ankle bone

reply to post by Shiloh7


Did not see that but wish I had. The thing that I can not understand (with out seeing "Secrets in the Museums) is that it would not agree with the shroud of Turin. The Shroud of Turin has had over four years of intensive scrutiny by over four hundred experts of Chemists, Biologists, Immunologists, Textile Experts, Photographers as well as other specialized fields and their papers state that the feet and ankles were pierced with one nail on a single post. That would not agree with an X which would require two nails for the feet.

As was mentioned by another post, how would it be explained that a sign was nailed on the cross above Jesus' head. You could not do this with an X could you? Could it be possible that several methods were used by the Romans?