GakuseiDon wrote:
<snip>
Tertullian and M. Felix use the shape of the cross in defence of Christianity's use of that shape, by claiming that pagans also rever that shape. As they describe it, the shape cannot be an "X". Here is M. Felix's view:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... avius.html
- You [pagans], indeed, who consecrate gods of wood, adore wooden crosses perhaps as parts of your gods. For your very standards, as well as your banners; and flags of your camp, what else are they but crosses glided and adorned? Your victorious trophies not only imitate the appearance of a simple cross, but also that of a man affixed to it. We assuredly see the sign of a cross, naturally, in the ship when it is carried along with swelling sails, when it glides forward with expanded oars; and when the military yoke is lifted up, it is the sign of a cross; and when a man adores God with a pure mind, with hands outstretched. Thus the sign of the cross either is sustained by a natural reason, or your own religion is formed with respect to it.
Tertullian makes a similar claim.
Roman warship:
Surely, this reference to M. Felix is far too late to be of any real benefit to the question of what shape the gospel crucifixion instrument was in the time of Pilate. Wikipedia gives a dating of 150 - 270 c.e. for his writing.
What the above mentioned documentary does is use two bones that have nails in them; a heel bone and a handbone. The documentary demonstrates three kinds of crucifixions with a man upon the various shapes. Both the
✝ and the
T found to be unsatisfactory. The
T being worse and death would be very quick re heart problems. In the
✝ shape, in particular, the body is in danger, because of its weight, of pulling itself down from the execution instrument. It is the
X that holds the body more securely - thus allowing for a very much slower death. I would think that the
X shape, with legs stretched apart, would give the body more stability when strung up i.e. body more balanced thus less inclined to fall forward. Since a long slow and painful death is part of the reason for crucifixion it seems obvious that the crucifixion instrument would be such as to enable that objective.
Below is a link to a pdf by Gunnar Samuelsson. Samuelsson is author of
'Crucifixion in Antiquity' - a book that caused many a newspaper headline when published re such headings as 'Jesus did not die on the cross'. Cross being the
✝. All Samuelsson was saying is that there is no evidence that the
✝ shape was used for the gospel Jesus crucifixion. (which is a moot point anyway for the ahistoricists/mythicists.....) The pdf title is the title of an upcoming new book by Samuelsson.
Crucifixion in Early Christianity
GUNNAR SAMUELSSON
https://www.academia.edu/4167205/Crucif ... ristianity
The issue for Christians is that the image that has become the Christian symbol - the
✝ - cannot be supported by textual examination nor, re the documentary, by physical evidence of Roman crucifixion.
Do symbols matter? Well, all I can say is - trying removing this one....
The whole ethos of Christianity is tied up with this symbol. Knocking it down would open a gateway to the unknown for millions of Christians - yep, of course, rethinking is needed - but rethinking is never a welcome visitor.....
Of course, Christians can continue to use the
✝ but what they can't do is claim historicity for the type of crucifixion this symbol depicts. And if this Christian crucifixion symbol, so relevant to the lives of Christians that it is enacted out each Easter with men strung up on crosses -
✝ - is so open to scholarly questioning - is it not yet one more X against the whole Jesus historicist position?
- "These people [the Jews] Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he bound to a cross and scourged, a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans, and so slew him'. Cassius Dio.
The documentary demonstrated that the
X crucifixion victim could be nailed while lying down i.e. nailed while lying on ones stomach or on ones back. A graphic image it showed was of a figure lying on the stomach with hand outstretched and nailed on the back of hand. I'm wondering if it would have been the lying on stomach method for Antigonus - re the above quote. In other words; was he scourged while on a
X - the back being the usual place for the scourging. If so, re Antigonus, his being nailed to a cross was
'back to front' in order to enable the scourging.
To sum up:
1) Antigonus was most likely crucified, re Dio, '
back to front' in order to enable scourging. An
X type instrument would facilitate this.
2) The gospel story does not detail any type of crucifixion instrument for it's literary Jesus figure. However, gJohn, with its suggestion that the Jesus figure died quickly - could indicate a move away from the
X shape instrument. Although, gJohn, being part of a gospel political allegory, might well have other reasons to suggest a quick death for his literary Jesus figure. (if Antigonus was crucified, i.e. nailed to a
X cross along with other ‘zealots’, then it is likely that he died before they did i.e. Antigonus was removed from the
X cross and beheaded. Thus, a ‘face to the front’ type
X crucifixion can’t be ruled out for anyone crucified under Pilate - as supposedly was a historical Jesus.
So......after all this....the Abba Cave handbone with a nail and a beheaded skull links these remains to Antigonus. The gospel writers, in creating their political allegory of Hasmonean history, depict their literary Jesus figure as scourged
prior to being crucified. A reversal of the actual history, re Dio, that happened to Antigonus. This reversal, within the gospel political allegory, allowed the gospel writers to drop any mention of the type of crucifixion instrument their literary figure was nailed to. Thus allowing the Jesus story to have it's own life apart from it's roots in Hasmonean history. i.e. in otherwords; if the gospel writers wrote that Jesus was crucified on a
X cross and it was known that this was the shape of the cross upon which Antigonus was crucified - then they would not be writing political allegory they would making a straightforward linkage of their story to Hasmonean history - which they obviously were not.
Scholarly arguments indicate that the shape of the gospel crucifixion cross for a ‘King of the Jews’ cannot be historically evidences as being that of a
✝ cross. The evidence of the Abba Cave bones suggest a
X upon which the last King of the Jews, Antigonus, was hung up alive and scourged. On the one hand is history. On the other hand is a gospel political allegory re-enacting, in literary form, historical tragedy. As once again, this Easter, in a few days time, many men will 'hang' themselves on
✝ crosses in order to re-enact an event they believe happened not just, as with the gospel writers, 70 years after the event, but nearly 2000 years after the event.
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
