Jump to content

Bible Says Jesus Was Not Crucified - But Hanged On A Tree!


Guest marabod
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi All. Being a newbie, I may not fully understand the atmosphere here, so I apologise if the topic that left me, a scientist and atheist, shocked, would not touch any sensitive strings. Below is not a result of some long and hard theologian work, but just a casual observation, made in another unnamed forum, mainly controlled by Christian Fundamentalists, despite its official neutrality. Few days ago I cam across a quote from the Acts, posted by someone for irrelevant purposes.

 

Acts 5:30 (King James Version)

 

30The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

 

Being surprised with such euphemism as "tree" to be used in order to describe the cross, I cross-checked the KJV translation versus all those which http://www.biblegateway.com/ offers, and it occurred that, say, both Russian translations, 18th century one and the latest one, say exactly the same word to word... Also using the word "tree" in a form of "drevo", ultimately meaning an alive tree with the roots and leaves... All with little exception translations from the Greek original of the Acts say approximately the same, with exception of a few (some later English versions) which change from "killed AND hanged on a tree" to "killed BY hanging on a tree").

 

I decided to look at the author of the Acts, as I am a chemist, not a Theologian, and I do not know New testament as well as I know the Old one. Research took about 2 minutes, as the Acts start with the author's address to a certain Theophille, for whom specially the Acts are written as a 2nd book about Christianity, while the first one was about Jesus himself. Given that the start is the same as of the Gospel of Luke, little doubts can be hold that they both were written by St Luke and addressed to the same friend of him, this very Theophille. note, please, that the same person in the Gospel does not mention any trees, but talks about well-known crucifixion.

 

I expressed this observation in the thread post, and nearly forgot about this, when another interested guy came up with the selection of related quotes, practically excluding any error in the above quoted passage. Namely:

 

Acts 10:39 (King James Version)

 

39And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:

 

Acts 13:29 (King James Version)

 

29And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.

 

One may have impression that St Luke was on the late stage of senility, when writing his 2nd book; however he has unexpected support from St Peter! And this one knew Jesus personally...

 

1 Peter 2:24 (King James Version)

 

24Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

 

In case if St Peter was having mental problems, there is also a supporting statement by St Paul!

 

Galatians 3:13 (King James Version)

 

13Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

 

The latter quote has a reference to deutoronomy, where the whole idea of hanging on a tree comes from.

 

King James Version (KJV)

Deuteronomy 21

 

22And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree:23His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

 

 

Interestingly enough, some later biblical versions tried to smoothen this bizarre version. Say, modern Chinese Bible and Martin Luther's Bible of 1555, get away by using a term, equally applicable to a living tree and to the wood products. Luther says "Holtz" and what Chinese say I would tell you if/after I learn the language myself. For me the above is unbelievable completely; I understand one can lie, but to deceive 6 billions currently living people! They ALL think Jesus was crucified, believe they in him or not!

 

Any independent opinions or discovered support verses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • mwc

    13

  • Neon Genesis

    10

  • Abiyoyo

    6

  • Shyone

    5

Top Posters In This Topic

 

 

I can almost see Jesus' followers stirring up the emotions of those around them by making this symbolic connection between the cross and a tree.

 

Phanta

This is the way I had always interpeted it as a Christian. Tree was always a poetic symbol for the tree. It didn't mean a literal tree; it was just the author using poetic imagery. For example, when the bible says Mary gave birth to a little lamb, it doesn't mean she literally gave birth to a lamb. The scriptures are using the lamb as symbolic imagery to represent Jesus. Likewise the tree is being used as symbolic imagery for the cross. We even sang hyms in church about Jesus being hung on a hymn, so Christians are aware of this; they just see it as poetic symbolism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acts 5:30 (King James Version)

 

30The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

 

Being surprised with such euphemism as "tree" to be used in order to describe the cross, I cross-checked the KJV translation versus all those which http://www.biblegateway.com/ offers, and it occurred that, say, both Russian translations, 18th century one and the latest one, say exactly the same word to word... Also using the word "tree" in a form of "drevo", ultimately meaning an alive tree with the roots and leaves... All with little exception translations from the Greek original of the Acts say approximately the same, with exception of a few (some later English versions) which change from "killed AND hanged on a tree" to "killed BY hanging on a tree").

 

Hi and welcome!

 

Drevo? Xylon? It looks like the word used in Acts for "tree" is used all over the NT in ways that do not mean a literal living tree--Mat 26:47, Mat 26:55, Mar 14:43, Mar 14:48, Luk 22:52, Act 16:24, 1Cr 3:12, Rev 18:12.

 

I'm new to studying the Bible, so I could be all wet on this, but that seems to create a pretty strong case for "tree" being used symbolically yet another way: hanging on a wooden cross.

 

I can almost see Jesus' followers stirring up the emotions of those around them by making this symbolic connection between the cross and a tree.

 

Deu 21:22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree. His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged [is] accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee [for] an inheritance.

 

Sort of a "Look what they did to them! They hung him on a TREE!", bringing up the emotional and mental connotations related to the Deuteronomy law.

 

Again, I'm new to this Bible stuff, so I could be full of crap, but as a person who studies literature in school (and people for fun!) it doesn't seem like a stretch.

 

Phanta

 

Hi. Yes, xylon. I am aware of this explanation. But there is something unnatural to it too. This meanings set as in

1) wood

 

a) that which is made of wood

 

1) as a beam from which any one is suspended, a gibbet, a cross

 

2) a log or timber with holes in which the feet, hands, neck of prisoners were inserted and fastened with thongs

 

3) a fetter, or shackle for the feet

 

4) a cudgel, stick, staff

 

2) a tree

 

exists in MODERN Greek language, while the NT was written in Old Greek. These are two different languages. Modern Greek was formed under strong influence of Christianity, so I guess 1700 years would be enough to insert yet another meaning into the language of fully controlled nation of church-goers.

 

This discrepancy in New Testament was obviously addressed years before, and the simplest way to avoid explanations of it was to add a new meaning to the word in question.

My impression is that while the Gospels were all edited before their approval on Nicene Congress, the Acts were somehow missed and added to canon with no editing, maybe they were not even looked at because they are mostly telling of the Apostles, not of Jesus himself, so Jesus is only mentioned in them... And as soon as they became canonical, the questions started to be addressed and it became too late to edit them.

 

But one thing is to explain and add another definition of Xylon to contemporary language, and another thing to translate from the older form of the same language. Hellenes in Greece were not using crucifixion at all, so hardly in 1st century AD they could have the word "tree" used for the beam on which someone hangs. Crucifixion is not even a Roman style of execution, as they were using beheading, but the Phoenician punishment used for the slaves in Carthage, so Romans most likely became familiar with it in the period of 2nd or even 3rd Punic wars, liked it and started to use in some circumstances. Crucifixion involves the element of torture under the sun and with abundance of flies around, so it could hardly be developed in Italian climate at all, while in the climate of Northern Africa it makes full sense. Flaubert reports the old tradition of the Punes to crucify the lions, which were threatening the local farmers around Carthage. They were left on their crosses in a manner we use scare-crow, to repel the others from attacking people. Romans, who had a fear of large felines, were shocked with Carthagenian might, when seeing these lions crucified in big numbers like pests.

 

All Biblican translations I came across, use the word "tree" while in their languages the material made from trees has another words for it. Hardly an English speaker would legitimately say "the chair is made of tree" but rather would use "of wood" for it. If this was related to the English translations only, I would've agreed, but what about other languages? Even modern Bulgarian translation uses "drevo" which is a living tree.

 

Neither all these languages avoid using the word "hang" in these passages - but a person on the cross was not "hanging" on it, this person was STRETCHED on it. Any type of "hanging" suggests that the object is affixed in its top part, leaving the bottom part unsupported - while on the cross the legs were supported by metal or wooden spikes, attaching the legs to the wooden post; also differently from our execution by hanging, this person was never pulled up on the cross, but stretched on it when the cross was still on the ground, and after this the cross was lifted and mounted in a ground hole similar to any wooden pole. Some European translations even ignore the order of the earlier translations, most likely because the interpreters clearly understand the original as talking about familiar to them common execution by hanging someone on a tree - so some say "killed and hanged on a tree" and some say "killed by hanging on a tree".

 

On the other hand Deuteronomy points about this curse to anyone hanged on a tree, so Christian Theology cannot afford to completely refuse from this idea, as it serves to prove that Jesus was thus cursed and died for the sins of the others, hence Paul's statement in Galatians. So one way or another this is a lie - either they forgot to remove the description of a "real" event having the desire to present it as crucifixion, OR they added this detail to make Jesus die for the sins of others. I guess, Christianity is anyway in the corner on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, it must not be a coincidence that Nicene Creed among all other things DEMANDS for any Christian to believe that Jesus was crucified, not anyhow else killed. Given the the Creed addresses the religious differences within contemporary Christianity (say, insists on the resurrection of the dead, as opposed to reincarnation concept, or points to compulsory virginity of Mary etc) there must have been the sects, disbelieving in Crucifixion those days! The Creed is short, and addresses the most important parts of the beliefs - if this was a historically registered execution style, why would it demand to believe in it? Also it wants the believers to believe it happened in connection to Pilate - why? Maybe he was just slayed in some village, in which the locals became sick of his preaching?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example, when the bible says Mary gave birth to a little lamb, it doesn't mean she literally gave birth to a lamb. The scriptures are using the lamb as symbolic imagery to represent Jesus.

 

Mary had a little lamb,

it's fleece was white as snow.

And everywhere that Mary went,

the lamb was sure to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

For example, when the bible says Mary gave birth to a little lamb, it doesn't mean she literally gave birth to a lamb. The scriptures are using the lamb as symbolic imagery to represent Jesus.

 

Mary had a little lamb,

it's fleece was white as snow.

And everywhere that Mary went,

the lamb was sure to go.

:lol:

 

 

I have a better photo

 

%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8F%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BD.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example, when the bible says Mary gave birth to a little lamb, it doesn't mean she literally gave birth to a lamb. The scriptures are using the lamb as symbolic imagery to represent Jesus.

 

Mary had a little lamb,

it's fleece was white as snow.

And everywhere that Mary went,

the lamb was sure to go.

:lol:

 

 

I have a better photo

 

%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8F%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BD.jpg

Forgive my density, but I don't understand the photo. It's beautiful. What is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

It is the bell tower from the church flooded by the reservoir waters of the power station. I was inspired by your signature "when there are no more churches"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the bell tower from the church flooded by the reservoir waters of the power station. I was inspired by your signature "when there are no more churches"

Oh, Wow! That's really something. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

It is the bell tower from the church flooded by the reservoir waters of the power station. I was inspired by your signature "when there are no more churches"

Oh, Wow! That's really something. Thanks.

 

Its in Russia, in the town of Kalyasin on Volga-river. That water around before 1930s was the central square.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, it must not be a coincidence that Nicene Creed among all other things DEMANDS for any Christian to believe that Jesus was crucified, not anyhow else killed. Given the the Creed addresses the religious differences within contemporary Christianity (say, insists on the resurrection of the dead, as opposed to reincarnation concept, or points to compulsory virginity of Mary etc) there must have been the sects, disbelieving in Crucifixion those days!

Well, there were also Christians like the Gnostics who rejected the resurrection of Jesus. They believed that Jesus' physical body was illusion and it was impossible for him to die, so the resurrection was hearsay to them. I recommend reading Bart D Ehrman's book Lost Christianities if you haven't yet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

By the way, it must not be a coincidence that Nicene Creed among all other things DEMANDS for any Christian to believe that Jesus was crucified, not anyhow else killed. Given the the Creed addresses the religious differences within contemporary Christianity (say, insists on the resurrection of the dead, as opposed to reincarnation concept, or points to compulsory virginity of Mary etc) there must have been the sects, disbelieving in Crucifixion those days!

Well, there were also Christians like the Gnostics who rejected the resurrection of Jesus. They believed that Jesus' physical body was illusion and it was impossible for him to die, so the resurrection was hearsay to them. I recommend reading Bart D Ehrman's book Lost Christianities if you haven't yet.

 

To be honest, I am a bit too old to rad again all the stuff like that, as I already know enough to have my own opinion. At the moment I am looking straight at the root of the problem: the Bible in its Christian canonical part several times openly states in several places, that Jesus was not crucified but hanged on a tree. I know this problem was existing in AD354, as Nicene Creed addresses it, and orders the Christians to believe, that he was not hanged on a tree but CRUCIFIED.

 

Nicene Creed is an important document, which established Catholic Apostolic Church, so for at least 1600 years (before the little sola scripture sects multiplied all around) when a person was saying "I am a Christian" there was no any need to ask what exactly this person believes in, as it was enough to open the Creed and it was saying the lot on behalf of this person. Exactly the same way, as when a person says "I am a Muslim", then it is clear that this person adheres to "La illaha illa Allah Muhammad ar rasud Allah", which is Islamic Simbol of Faith.

 

At the current moment many people claim to be Christians - but they do not believe in Nicene Creed, instead they say "I follow the Bible" or "I follow the Gospels" or something like that. Right... Now we have St Luke saying in his Gospel that Jesus was crucified, and in his later book "The Acts" that he was killed and hanged on a tree (which is a JEWISH custom how to deal with those violating JEWISH Law (and Jesus, according to the Gospels, violated it many times.). So what I, a sola scripture adept, am supposed to believe in?

 

Traditional Nicene Catholic Apostolic Church and all its late schisms officially saw the Bible in its canonical part as Word of God and thus infallible. But they never were insisting for the followers to FOLLOW the Bible! Followers wee not supposed to read the Bible at all, at least on regular basis - if they had some doubts, they were supposed to go to enlightened Priest to get the explanations. One such "enlightened" explanations I received above in this thread - that the word "xylon" means a tree and the same time a selection of timber products, such as chairs, benches, wardrobes, matches, ships, fences and... a beam from which someone hangs, a cross. Bwahahahaha!

Stupid? Yes. But if I trust this particularly village priest, I would swallow this explanation. Anyway, I am not obliged to follow the Bible, and my beloved Nicene Creed says "believe in crucifixion".

 

Another situation is with FOLLOWING the Bible. Bible says "hanged on a tree" - why would I think "crucified"? Nevertheless, our non-Nicene holy heretics, which are selling Jesus door-to-door, insist he was crucified. WHY? Precisely because they follow not the Bible, but someone's opinion about it. What I want to follow - I follow, what I want not to follow - I don't follow! St Luke says "crucified" in his Gospel - I follow. The same St Luke says "killed and hanged" - I don't follow. WHY? To me the answer is simple - "Because I do not THINK and follow what I was told to follow". So much about "following the Bible" I guess. A person which selects what exactly to follow and what not, cannot say "I follow the Bible". It is either - or, a girl cannot be partly pregnant!

 

Now, just for a second - imagine a fella brought up like that, being a president of an important country, and as such following its Constitution. It, say, says "religious freedoms" - so the guy may announce atheists to be non-citizens, as they have no religion and thus are out of constitutional field! Was this not Bush-senior? Such "follower" can kill only because the Bible says "don't kill", of course if someone provides help with interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ξύλον (xulon, 3586), -ου, τό, (fr. ξύω to scrape, plane), fr. Hom. down; Sept. for עֵץ;

 

1. wood: univ. 1 Co. iii. 12; ξ. θύϊνον, Rev. xviii. 12; that which, is made of wood, as a beam from which any one is suspended, a gibbet, a cross, [A. V. tree, q. v. in B. D. Am. ed.], Acts v. 30; x. 39; xiii. 29; Gal. iii. 13; 1 Pet. ii. 24, (עֵץ, Gen. xl. 19; Deut. xxi. 23; Josh. x. 26; Esth. v. 14), — a use not found in the classics [cf. L. and S. s. v. II. 4]. A log or timber with holes in which the feet, hands, neck, of prisoners were inserted and fastened with thongs (Gr. κᾶλον, ξυλοπέδη, ποδοκάκη, ποδοστράβη, Lat. nervus, by which the Lat. renders the Hebr. סַד, a fetter, or shackle for the feet, Job [xiii. 27]; xxxiii. 11; cf. Fischer, De vitiis lexx. Ν. Τ. p. 458 sqq.; [b. D. s. v. Stocks]): Acts xvi. 24 (Hdt. 6, 75; 9, 37; Arstph. eq. 367, 394, 705); a cudgel, stick, staff: plur., Mt. xxvi. 47, 55; Mk. xiv. 43, 48; Lk. xxii. 52, (Hdt. 2, 63; 4, 180; Dem. p. 645, 15; Polyb. 6, 37, 3; Joseph. b. j. 2, 9, 4; Hdian. 7, 7, 4).

 

2. a tree: Lk. xxiii. 31 (Gen. i. 29; ii. 9; iii. 1; Is. xiv. 8, etc.); ξ. τῆς ζωῆς, see ζωή, 2 b. p. 274a.

[ξύν, older form of σύν, retained occasionally in compounds, as ξυμβαίνω, 1 Pet. iv. 12 ed. Bezae; see Meisterhans § 49, 11; L. and S. s. x. σύν, init.; and cf. Σ, σ, ς.]

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

ξύλον (xulon, 3586), -ου, τό, (fr. ξύω to scrape, plane), fr. Hom. down; Sept. for עֵץ;

 

1. wood: univ. 1 Co. iii. 12; ξ. θύϊνον, Rev. xviii. 12; that which, is made of wood, as a beam from which any one is suspended, a gibbet, a cross, [A. V. tree, q. v. in B. D. Am. ed.], Acts v. 30; x. 39; xiii. 29; Gal. iii. 13; 1 Pet. ii. 24, (עֵץ, Gen. xl. 19; Deut. xxi. 23; Josh. x. 26; Esth. v. 14), — a use not found in the classics [cf. L. and S. s. v. II. 4]. A log or timber with holes in which the feet, hands, neck, of prisoners were inserted and fastened with thongs (Gr. κᾶλον, ξυλοπέδη, ποδοκάκη, ποδοστράβη, Lat. nervus, by which the Lat. renders the Hebr. סַד, a fetter, or shackle for the feet, Job [xiii. 27]; xxxiii. 11; cf. Fischer, De vitiis lexx. Ν. Τ. p. 458 sqq.; [b. D. s. v. Stocks]): Acts xvi. 24 (Hdt. 6, 75; 9, 37; Arstph. eq. 367, 394, 705); a cudgel, stick, staff: plur., Mt. xxvi. 47, 55; Mk. xiv. 43, 48; Lk. xxii. 52, (Hdt. 2, 63; 4, 180; Dem. p. 645, 15; Polyb. 6, 37, 3; Joseph. b. j. 2, 9, 4; Hdian. 7, 7, 4).

 

2. a tree: Lk. xxiii. 31 (Gen. i. 29; ii. 9; iii. 1; Is. xiv. 8, etc.); ξ. τῆς ζωῆς, see ζωή, 2 b. p. 274a.

[ξύν, older form of σύν, retained occasionally in compounds, as ξυμβαίνω, 1 Pet. iv. 12 ed. Bezae; see Meisterhans § 49, 11; L. and S. s. x. σύν, init.; and cf. Σ, σ, ς.]

mwc

 

Thank you very much for your powerful support! That what your refer to, completely clears and justifies my position - that the meaning of XYLON as that which, is made of wood, as a beam from which any one is suspended, a gibbet, a cross exists EXCLUSIVELY in the passages from the Acts, Galatians and Pet II which I quoted, but nowhere else within the Bible! While I am not a specialist in Old Greek, which is the original language of the Gospels we have available, I can suggest this meaning was additionally introduced into the language after 4th century AD under influence of Nicene Council, which ordered to interpret XYLON this particular way (which decision is firmly pointed out to in Nicene Creed, which orders the Christians to believe that Jesus was crucified, not anyhow else executed).

 

Despite from your reference it may also mean he was in fact placed in the shackles, I would dismiss this interpretation as there is no biblical and historical support for it, but there is a strong support for him being hanged on a tree as a heretic, as you correctly point to Deutoronomy 21:22,23

 

22And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree:

 

23His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

 

Verse 23 fully explains no resistance, which Mary and others met when taking him off the tree for burial, as this is also a part of Jewish Law.

 

If you are interested to further help me in my research, would you be so kind to also find ANY reference from the Greek literature of antiquity (say, before AD 200) which uses the word XYLON for a cross, or beam, on which the criminals were mounted for executions? Thank you again! I would certainly check Plutarch's Greek texts, as he describes crucifixion of Spartacus and other rebel slaves by Crass and Pompei (forgot only in whose of them life description he does this, I think of Crass). What I am only afraid is that he was writing them in Latin, as this was the main language of the Empire - so they were immediately read and spread in Rome, not in Greece...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

Thus another interesting conclusion may arrive - that Jesus was not in fact killed by the Romans of Pilate, and was not executed in Roman style, but was not executed formally at all, but rather seized and killed by the Jews themselves, who saw him as a heretic! Probably Pilate appeared there only as an ideological action of the Roman authorities, who admitted their [non-existent] contribution to his death only in order to create in Romans the complex of guilt, sort of "ahh, we helped the Jews to kill our God!" and thus facilitate the mass conversion of the Pagans into Christianity, already planned to be made a state religion - precisely because it tames people and allows a weak one to enslave a strong one (see F Nietzsche "Anti-Christian"). This explains why that phrase, allegedly added to Tacitus' Annuals, mentions that Pilate in the reign of Tiberius executed "some christ". Wow!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon

 

xulon [u^], to (pl. spelt

A.
xulea
Abh. Berl. Akad.
1928(6).32 (Cos, v B. C.)),
wood
cut and ready for use,
firewood, timber
, etc., Hom., mostly in pl., Il.8.507,547, Od.14.418 ; x. nêïa ship-
timber
, Hes.Op. 808 ; x. naupêgêsima Th.7.25 , X.An.6.4.4, Pl.Lg.706b, D.17.28 ; x. tetragôna
logs
cut square, Hdt.1.186, cf. Pl.Prt.325d, Arist.EN 1109b7.

 

2.
in pl., also,
the wood-market
, epi xula ienai Ar.Fr. 403 .

 

II.
in sg.,
piece of wood, log, beam, post
, once in Hom., x. auon . . ê druos ê peukês Il.23.327 ; x. sukinon
spoon made of
fig
wood
, Pl.Hp.Ma.291c ;
peg
or
lever
, Arist.MA701b9 ;
perch
, epi xulou katheudein Ar.Nu.1431 : by poet. periphr., Argous xulon A.Fr.20 ; hippoio kakon x., of the Trojan horse, AP9.152 (Agath.) : hence [p. 1192] anything made of wood, as,

 

2.
cudgel, club
, Hdt.2.63,4.180, Ar.Lys.357, PHal.1.187 (iii B.C.); meta xulôn eispêdêsai PTeb.304.10 (ii A.D.); xulois suntripsein Luc.
Demon
.50 ; of the
club
of Heracles, Plu.Lyc.30.

 

3.
an instrument of punishment
,

 

a.
wooden collar
, put on the neck of the prisoner, xulôi phimoun ton auchena Ar.Nu.592 ; es tetrêmenon x. enkatharmosai . . ton auchena Id.Lys.680 ; or,

 

b.
stocks
, in which the feet were confined, Hdt.9.37, 6.75, Ar.Eq.367, D.18.129 ; x. ephelkein Polyzel.3 ; en tôi x. dedesthai Lys.10.16 (v. podokakkê), cf. Act.Ap.16.24, OGI483.181 (Pergam., ii A.D.) : also in pl., edêsen en tois x. And.1.45 .

 

c.
pentesuringon xulon (v. sub voc.) was a combination of both, with holes for the neck, arms, and legs, Ar.Eq.1049.

 

d.
gallows
, kremasai tina epi xulou LXX De.21.22 ; x. didumon ib.Jo.8.29 : prov., ex axiou tou xulou kan apanxasthai, i.e. if one must be hanged, at least let it be on a noble tree,
App
.Prov.2.67, cf. Ar.Ra.736 ; in NT, of the
cross
, Act.Ap.5.30,10.39.

 

e.
stake
on which criminals were impaled, Alex.222.10.

 

4.
bench, table
, esp.
money-changer's table
, D.45.33.

 

5.
prôton xulon front
bench
in the Athenian theatre, Ar.Ach.25, V.90, cf. Sch.adlocc. : hence houpi tôn xulôn the official who had to take care of the
seats
, Hermipp.9 (according to Meineke).

 

6.
the Hippocratic
bench
, Hp.
Fract
.13,
Art
.72.

 

III.
of live wood,
tree
, [oros] dasu pollois kai pantodapois kai megalois xulois X.An.6.4.5 , cf. Call.
Cer
.41, Agatharch.55, LXX Ca.2.3, al. : opp. sarx, Thphr.HP1.2.6,al. ; tôi x. tou dendrou analogon tên legomenên einai gên Plot.6.7.11 ; to x. tês ampelou E.Cyc.572 ; eiria apo xulou, of cotton, Hdt.3.47 ; heimata apo xulôn pepoiêmena Id.7.65 , cf.Poll.7.75.

 

IV.
of persons,
blockhead
, APl.4.187 ; of a stubborn person, sidêros tis ê x. pros tas deêseis Ach.Tat.5.22 .

 

V.
a measure oflength
, = 3 (also 2 2/3) cubits, the side of the naubion, Hero *
Geom
.23.4,11, POxy.669.11,28 (iii A.D.), 1053 (vi/vii A.D.).

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

But the word in originals is not "xUlon" but "xYlon" with Y (ee-Greek). Must be pronounced (as far as I understand) as "Zilon" (or as "Ksilon"). Means "tree" - and translated exactly as "tree" in all known Biblical translations. Not as "beam" or "cross".

 

Calling all timber products with the word "tree" could be hardly possible for the Greeks of 1st-2nd centuries AD, as already in 6th century BC they reached such perfection in woodworking art (specially Sparta with its culture of wood/ivory mosaics on the ceilings and beds) that not only any tree type but all specific little details made of timbers had their own words. Don't forget, that was not a tribe Mumbo-Jumbo, it was an old civilisation. I read their authors as if they are the modern ones, so rich is their language. Just read Plutarch's "Licurgus".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acts 5:30
ho theos tōn paterōn hēmōn ēgeiren Iēsoun, hon humeis diecheirisasthe kremasantes epi
xulou· (ξύ.λου·)

Acts 10:39
kai hēmeis martures pantōn hōn epoiēsen en te tēi chōrai tōn Ioudaiōn kai en Hierousalēm, hon kai aneilan kremasantes epi
xulou. (ξύ.λου.)

Acts 13:29
hōs de etelesan panta ta peri autou gegrammena, kathelontes apo tou
xulou (ξύ.λου)
ethēkan eis mnēmeion.

 

1 Peter 2:24
hos tas hamartias hēmōn autos anēnenken en tōi sōmati autou epi to
xulon (ξύ.λον)
, hina tais hamartiais apogenomenoi tēi dikaiosunēi zēsōmen· ohu tōi mōlōpi iathēt

 

Galatians 3:13
Christos hēmas exēgorasen ek tēs kataras tou nomou genomenos huper hēmōn katara, hoti gegraptai, epikataratos pas ho kremamenos epi
xulou, (ξύ.λου,)

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the word in originals is not "xUlon" but "xYlon" with Y (ee-Greek). Must be pronounced (as far as I understand) as "Zilon" (or as "Ksilon"). Means "tree" - and translated exactly as "tree" in all known Biblical translations. Not as "beam" or "cross".

 

THE ELEMENTS OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

J.W.WENHAM

 

Upsilon Υ υ u like oo in 'book' (7)

 

(7) In English words derived from Greek, υ becomes y, e.g. ύηοκριτης

becomes 'hypocrite' (Vocab. 9). (Our capital Υ has come from the

Greek capital Υ through Latin.) ev, however, sometimes becomes ev,

e.g. evayyeXtov, 'evangel'.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

But the word in originals is not "xUlon" but "xYlon" with Y (ee-Greek). Must be pronounced (as far as I understand) as "Zilon" (or as "Ksilon"). Means "tree" - and translated exactly as "tree" in all known Biblical translations. Not as "beam" or "cross".

 

THE ELEMENTS OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

J.W.WENHAM

 

Upsilon Υ υ u like oo in 'book' (7)

 

(7) In English words derived from Greek, υ becomes y, e.g. ύηοκριτης

becomes 'hypocrite' (Vocab. 9). (Our capital Υ has come from the

Greek capital Υ through Latin.) ev, however, sometimes becomes ev,

e.g. evayyeXtov, 'evangel'.

 

mwc

 

To be honest I do not care what of Greek becomes what in English, as in Cyrillic directly based on Greek Y was the same sound as I (iota) and was called "ee-Greek" for the last 1000 years till 1918. Same usage of Y as a form of I one can observe in Latin.

 

The matter is not of the letters of the Alphabet at all, but in the fact that the word XYLON means "cross" only in modern Greek, from which dictionary you were giving the explanation - and those verses I had pointed to are the only verses in NT in which this word has such meaning. I thought you were supporting my discovery, but it does not seem to be like that now, as you are trying to derail any further research by introducing the suggestion for me to learn Greel Language -very understandable (lol) but obviously not necessary for the purposes of the current discussions, as no European translation of NT for the last 1700 years accepts your explanation, and stubbornly translates this word XYLON as a "TREE" - not as timber, lumber, wood, chair, bed, cross or anything else. Does it ring the bell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History of Greek

Koine Greek

 

For centuries, the Greek language had existed in multiple dialects. As Greek culture under Alexander the Great (356–323 BC) and his successors spread from Asia Minor to Egypt and the border regions of India the Attic dialect became the basis of the Koiné (Κοινή; "common"). The language was also learned by the inhabitants of the regions that Alexander conquered, turning Greek into a world language. The Greek language continued to thrive after Alexander, during the Hellenistic period (323 BC to 31 BC). During this period the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, appeared.

 

For many centuries Greek was the lingua franca of the eastern half of the Roman Empire. It was during Roman times that the Greek New Testament appeared, and Koiné Greek is also called "New Testament Greek" after its most famous work of literature.

 

Medieval and Modern Greek

 

Greek was the official language of the Eastern Roman Empire (or Byzantine Empire) until Constantinople fell to the Ottomans in 1453.

 

After the establishment of Greece as an independent state in 1829, the Katharévusa (Καθαρεύουσα) form—Greek for "purified language"—was sanctioned as the official language of the state and the only acceptable form of Greek in Greece. The whole attempt led to a linguistic war and the creation of literary factions: the Dhimotikistés (Δημοτικιστές), who supported the common (Demotic) dialect, and the Lóyii (Λόγιοι), or Katharevusyáni (Καθαρευουσιάνοι), who supported the "purified dialect". Up to that point, use of Dhimotikí in state affairs was generally frowned upon. Use of the Demotic dialect in state speech and paperwork was forbidden.

 

The fall of the Junta of 1974 and the end of the era of Metapolítefsi 1974–76 brought the acceptance of the Demotic dialect as both the de facto and de jure forms of the language for use by the Greek government, though the Katharevousa movement has left marks in the language.

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Any independent opinions or discovered support verses?

 

Well. The Acts 5 and 10 are Peter speaking. Acts 13 was Paul speaking, as with Galatians. The Jews did accuse Christ of blasphemy and wanted to put Him to death; yet they were required to consult the Roman officials, which would make sense that they let them crucify Him.

 

I am trying to understand your point here about the tree passages. Are you saying that the Jews killed Jesus by hanging him from a tree instead of the traditional Roman crucifixion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

 

 

Any independent opinions or discovered support verses?

 

Well. The Acts 5 and 10 are Peter speaking. Acts 13 was Paul speaking, as with Galatians. The Jews did accuse Christ of blasphemy and wanted to put Him to death; yet they were required to consult the Roman officials, which would make sense that they let them crucify Him.

 

I am trying to understand your point here about the tree passages. Are you saying that the Jews killed Jesus by hanging him from a tree instead of the traditional Roman crucifixion?

 

No! I am not saying this, as I never witnessed the execution myself - I am saying that the BIBLE says this. In black and white. In all languages available. And this is supported by the second word, ALL translations use - "hanged", because a person on the cross was not hanged on it, but crucified, stretched on it. And this person was not hanging on an already vertical cross, but was pinned to it with all 4 limbs. Luke says this in Acts, Peter says this in Pet 2 and Paul says this in Galatians; moreover Deuteronomy appears to be a main source mentioning this procedure first.

 

I only read what is in the book, I do not interpret the writings anyhow, and I am not an ancient Greek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marabod

History of Greek

Koine Greek

 

For centuries, the Greek language had existed in multiple dialects. As Greek culture under Alexander the Great (356–323 BC) and his successors spread from Asia Minor to Egypt and the border regions of India the Attic dialect became the basis of the Koiné (Κοινή; "common"). The language was also learned by the inhabitants of the regions that Alexander conquered, turning Greek into a world language. The Greek language continued to thrive after Alexander, during the Hellenistic period (323 BC to 31 BC). During this period the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, appeared.

 

For many centuries Greek was the lingua franca of the eastern half of the Roman Empire. It was during Roman times that the Greek New Testament appeared, and Koiné Greek is also called "New Testament Greek" after its most famous work of literature.

 

Medieval and Modern Greek

 

Greek was the official language of the Eastern Roman Empire (or Byzantine Empire) until Constantinople fell to the Ottomans in 1453.

 

After the establishment of Greece as an independent state in 1829, the Katharévusa (Καθαρεύουσα) form—Greek for "purified language"—was sanctioned as the official language of the state and the only acceptable form of Greek in Greece. The whole attempt led to a linguistic war and the creation of literary factions: the Dhimotikistés (Δημοτικιστές), who supported the common (Demotic) dialect, and the Lóyii (Λόγιοι), or Katharevusyáni (Καθαρευουσιάνοι), who supported the "purified dialect". Up to that point, use of Dhimotikí in state affairs was generally frowned upon. Use of the Demotic dialect in state speech and paperwork was forbidden.

 

The fall of the Junta of 1974 and the end of the era of Metapolítefsi 1974–76 brought the acceptance of the Demotic dialect as both the de facto and de jure forms of the language for use by the Greek government, though the Katharevousa movement has left marks in the language.

mwc

 

Thank you, mwc for enlightening me about Greek History, and I noticed that the fall of Junta in 1974-76 had a major contribution to the national custom of them calling the cross with the name of xylon. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To make matters even more confusing, other early sources also say he was stoned to death and buried in a cave. The real problem is that there are no reliable records from anywhere near that time and the questionable records that are available all have significant differences in the details about his death. You might as well say he was executed by aruru.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.