Hope of Israel Ministries (Ecclesia of YEHOVAH):

The "CROSS" of the Messiah!

"Quickly throwing his own clothes back on him, they half-dragged, half-carried him from the garrison room back to the street. They led him out, and, holding up the heavy wooden beam he was to bear, slowly lowered it on to his hideously torn back. Then, urging him on with whips, they began to lead the procession through the crowds...When they first placed the heavy beam on Jesus' back, he trudged a few painful steps, and crying out in pain, stumbled and fell under the weight.

"As the mob wound through the streets, they grabbed a man out of the crowd who happened to be Simon of Cyrene, a well-known older man, the father of Alexander and Rufus. The soldiers laid Jesus' stake on him, so he could trail along after Jesus....

"The grisly procession continued out of the gate, turned slightly to its left and passing through a stony area where the herdsmen gathered their flocks for sale, descended along a pathway into a pleasant garden area bounded by a group of trees against the bluff of a large limestone outcropping.

"Turning to the left, they started climbing this rocky hill, until they achieved the grassy slope atop it, and thus could look back at the city of Jerusalem only about two or three city blocks away from this height. The hollowed-out caves in the face of the limestone outcropping had given rise to its name, 'the place of the skull,' which was the meaning of its Hebrew name, Golgotha.

"There the hole was dug for the stake, and Jesus' body was nailed to it, his arms wrenched over his head and driven firmly to the timber with a single spike through them, while his feet were fastened to the wood with a large spike driven between the bones of his toes.

"Then he was hoisted in the air as the stake was jammed into the ground. A scream of sheer agony spasmodically burst forth from Jesus as the soldiers labored with shovels to insure that the stake was propped upright." [1]

This graphic and often gut-wrenching excerpt from Garner Ted Armstrong's book purports to show the way Yeshua the Messiah was fastened to the instrument of his death.

Apart from the obvious geographical inaccuracies (see our article, Just Where in Jerusalem Did Our Savior Die?), is this an accurate account of the mode of crucifixion that the Messiah underwent?

The Jehovah's Witnesses also believe the Messiah was nailed to a single, upright post or stake:

"There is no evidence that the Greek word stauros' meant here [Matthew 10:38] a "cross" such as the pagans used as a religious symbol for many centuries before Christ to denote the sun-god.

"In the classical Greek the word stau.ros' meant merely an upright stake or pale, or a pile such as is used for a foundation. The verb stau.ro'o meant to fence with pales, to form a stockade or palisade, and this is the verb used when the mob called for Jesus to be impaled...The root verb stau.ro'o occurs more than 40 times [in the New Testament], and we have rendered it "impale," with the footnote: "Or, 'fasten on a stake or pole."'

"The inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures wrote in the common (koi.ne') Greek and used the word stau.ros' to mean the same thing as in the classical Greek, namely, a stake or pale, a simple one without a crossbeam of any kind or at any angle. There is no proof to the contrary. The apostles Peter and Paul also use the word xy'lon to refer to the torture instrument upon which Jesus was nailed, and this argues that it was an upright stake without a crossbeam, for that is what xy'lon in this special sense means. (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; I Peter 2:24) At Ezra 6:11 we find xy'lon in the Greek Septuagint (I Esdras 6:31), and there it is spoken of as a beam on which the violator of law was to be hanged, the same as at Luke 23:39; Acts 5:30; 10:39.

"The fact that stau.ros' is translated crux in the Latin versions furnishes no argument against this. Any authoritative Latin dictionary will inform the examiner that the basic meaning of crux is a "tree, frame, or other wooden instrument of execution" on which criminals were impaled or hanged (Lewis-Short). A cross is only a later meaning of crux." [2]

Another viewpoint is presented by author Bo Reicke in his work :

"On his way from the Praetorium to the place of crucifixion, Jesus, as was customary, had to carry the transverse beam (Latin patibulum) of the cross between the rows of spectators, while the upright (Greek stauros, "post"; Latin palus, stipes) stood in place at the execution site and was used over and over again...

"The details of the crucifixion can be reconstructed as follows. Upon the hill stood several permanent uprights, doubtless strong, but no more than about ten feet high. In the middle was a kind of wooden seat (Latin "sedile"). At the top, or a little beneath it, there was a groove to receive the transverse beam; in the first case, the cross had three arms (like a "t"), in the second case, four arms (Latin "crux commissa" or "immissa")...

"The prisoner was stripped and his arms were tied to the transverse beam; nails were sometimes driven through his hands (here, again, according to John 20:23). He was then placed on the seat, the transverse beam and his feet were tied to the upright, and the notice of the complaint was attached to the top (Matthew 27:35-37 and parallels). The victim was to hang in this agonizing position until released by death, which usually came about through difficulty in breathing and stoppage of circulation, not so much through loss of blood." [3]

Was this, then, the way the Messiah was crucified? Obviously, there are several ideas or theories about the form of crucifixion the Messiah suffered.

To a Roman Catholic the cross is the most important symbol of his faith. As such it is found displayed on top of roofs and towers, and can be seen on altars, furnishings and ecclesiastical garments. In the majority of Catholic churches, the floor plan of the structure is laid out in the shape of the cross. And, of course, Catholic homes, hospitals and schools have the cross adorning the walls. Everywhere in the Catholic world the cross is outwardly honored and adored in a myriad of ways.

During baptism, when an infant is sprinkled, the officiating priest makes the sign of the cross upon its forehead reciting: "Receive the sign of the cross upon thy forehead." When an initiate receives confirmation, he or she is signed with the cross; and ashes are used to make a cross on the forehead of fervent Catholics during Ash Wednesday. When a Catholic goes to church, he dips the forefinger of the right hand in "holy water" before entering into the church proper -- touching the forehead, the chest, the left and the right shoulder, thus tracing the figure of the cross. During Mass, the Catholic priest blesses the altar with the cross sign 30 times and makes the sign of the cross 16 times.

In general, Protestant churches do not believe in making the sign of the cross or in worshipping the instrument of the Messiah's suffering -- recognizing that these things are unscriptural and superstitious. Nevertheless, the use of the cross has quite often been retained on steeples, pulpits and in numerous other ways as a form of decoration.

It was not until Christianity became paganized (or, more correctly perhaps, paganism became Christianized), that the image of the cross came to be considered a Christian symbol. In the year 431 A.D. crosses in churches and in chambers were introduced by the apostatizing Catholic Church, while the use of crosses on steeples was not sanctioned until about 586 A.D. During the sixth century the Universal or Catholic Church sanctioned the crucifix image and, after the Council at Ephesus, required that private homes possess a cross.

While the cross is a symbol of many so-called Christian churches today, it cannot be maintained that its origin was within true Christianity -- it was a sacred symbol among many non-Christian peoples long before the Messiah ever arrived on the scene! According to the Encyclopedia Britannica the

"cross has been used both as a religious symbol and as an ornament from the dawn of man's civilization. Various objects, dating from periods long anterior to the Christian era, have been found, in almost every part of the old world. India, Syria, Persia and Egypt have all yielded numberless examples, while numerous instances, dating from the later Stone Age to Christian times, have been found in nearly every part of Europe. The use of the cross as a religious symbol in pre-Christian times and among non-Christian peoples may probably be regarded as almost universal, and in very many cases it was connected with some form of nature worship. Two of the most frequent forms of pre-Christian cross are the Tau cross, so named from its resemblance to the Greek capital letter T, and the swastika or fylfot....The Tau cross with a handle (crux ansata) often occurs in Egyptian and Assyrian sculptures as a symbol of divinity." [4]

On the walls and monuments of ancient Egypt, one can readily see the use of the Tau cross. Notes the famed historian William F. Seymour in reference to Egypt:

"Here unchanged for thousands of years, we find among her most sacred hieroglyphics the cross in various forms...but the one known specially as the 'cross of Egypt,' or the Tau cross, is shaped like the letter T, often with a circle or ovoid above it. Yet this mystical symbol was not peculiar to this country, but was reverenced...among the Chaldeans, Phoenicians, Mexicans, and every ancient people in both hemispheres." [5]

Even The Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges that "the sign of the cross, represented in its simplest form by a crossing of two lines at right angles, greatly antedates, in both the East and the West, the introduction of Christianity. It goes back to a very remote period of human civilization. [6]

"But," you might ask, "since our Savior died on a cross does this not make it a Christian symbol?" While it is true that to most people the cross has come to be associated with the Messiah, there are a few (knowing full well its history and the superstition surrounding it) who look at it in a different way. After all, the Messiah was not the first to be crucified on some sort of a cross. William Seymour notes that crucifixion as a method of death "was used in ancient times as a punishment for flagrant crimes in Egypt, Assyria, Persia, Palestine, Carthage, Greece, and Rome....Tradition ascribes the invention of the punishment of the cross to a woman, the Queen Semiramis"! [7]

Obviously the Messiah died on some sort of a cross -- and yet MANY kinds of crosses are used in the Catholic religion. A page in the Catholic Encyclopedia shows forty -- if you do a little research you will probably come up with even more! This prompts a question: If the Catholic use of the cross began simply with the cross the Messiah died on -- and was not influenced by paganism -- why do they use so many different types in their worship? A noted author says:

"Of the several varieties of the cross still in vogue, as national and ecclesiastical emblems, distinguished by the familiar appellations of St. George, St. Andrew, the Maltese, the Greek, the Latin, etc., these is not one amongst them the existence of which may not be traced to the remotest antiquity"! [8]

So now we come to the bottom line -- what sort of cross did Yeshua the Messiah pay the supreme sacrifice on and who nailed him to the cross? Surprises are in store!

In 1986, The Journal of the American Medical Association carried an article that makes some interesting points:

"In its earliest form in Persia, the victim [of crucifixion] was either tied to a tree or was tied to or impaled on an upright post, usually to keep the guilty victim's feet from touching holy ground. Only later was a true cross used; it was characterized by an upright post (stipes) and a horizontal crossbar (patibulum), and it had several variations. Although archaeological and historical evidence strongly indicates that the low Tau cross was preferred by the Romans in Palestine at the time of Christ, crucifixion practices often varied in a given geographical region and in accordance with the imagination of the executioners, and the Latin cross and other forms also may have been used." [9]

The medical report goes on to discuss other interesting aspects of the crucifixion process:

"It was customary for the condemned man to carry his own cross from the flogging post to the site of crucifixion outside the city walls. He was usually naked, unless this was prohibited by local customs. Since the weight of the entire cross was probably well over 300 pounds, only the crossbar was carried. The patibulm, weighing 75 to 125 pounds, was placed across the nape of the victim's neck and balanced along both shoulders. Usually the outstretched arms then were tied to the crossbar.

"Outside the city walls were permanently located the heavy upright wooden stipes, on which the patibulum would be secured. In the case of the Tau cross, this was accomplished by means of a mortise and tenon joint, with or without reinforcement by ropes. To prolong the crucifixion process, a horizontal wooden block or plank, serving as a crude seat (sedile or sedulum), often was attached midway down the stipes.

"Only very rarely, and probably later than the time of Christ, was an additional block (suppendaneum) employed for transfixion of the feet....The criminal was then thrown to the ground on his back, with his arms outstretched along the patibulum. The hands could be nailed or tied to the crossbar, but nailing apparently was preferred by the Romans."

The medical report concludes by saying:

"Furthermore, ossuary findings and the Shroud of Turin have documented that the nails [plural] commonly were driven through the wrist rather than the palms.

"After both arms were fixed to the crossbar, the patibulum and the victim, together, were lifted onto the stipes. On the low cross, four soldiers could accomplish this relatively easily. However, in the tall cross, the soldiers used either wooden forks or ladders.

"Next, the feet were fixed to the cross, either by nails or ropes. Ossuary findings and the Shroud of Turin suggest that nailing was the preferred Roman practice. Although the feet could be fixed to the sides of the stipes or to a wooden footrest (suppendaneum), they usually were nailed directly to the front of the stipes. To accomplish this, flexion of the knees may have been quite prominent, and the bent legs may have been rotated laterally....

"The length of survival generally ranged from three or four hours to three or four days and appears to have been inversely related to the severity of the scourging [and also the type of cross]. However, even if the scourging had been relatively mild, the Roman soldiers could hasten death by breaking the legs below the knees (crurifragium or skelokopia)."

This same report lists nine variations in the type of cross employed by the Romans throughout their history. They are as follows:

1/. Infelix lignum -- Tree

2/. Crux simplex -- Upright post

3/. Crux composita -- Stipes and Patibulum

4/. Crux humilis -- Low cross

5/. Crux sublimis -- Tall cross

6/. Crux commissa -- T shaped (Tau) cross

7/. Crux immissa -- t shaped (Latin) cross

8/. Crux capitata -- t shaped (Latin) cross

9/. Crux decussata -- X shaped cross

At the time of the Messiah, however, there were three basic modes of crucifixion referred to by the Roman philosopher Seneca:

"I see," he says, "three crosses, not indeed of one sort, but fashioned in different ways; one sort suspending by the head persons bent toward the earth, others transfixing them through their secret parts [crux simplex], others extending their arms on a patibulum [crux composita]." [10]

Note that Seneca doesn't mention WHAT the patibulum, along with the victim, was attached to! This is important as we will see later.

Can we eliminate some of these variations and determine the exact mode of crucifixion our Savior underwent? And, if we can, does it really matter; or is this just an exercise in useless details? Yes, we can determine the correct mode of crucifixion; and yes, it does matter -- in fact it's crucial to an understanding of the sacrifice of the Messiah! A correct understanding of how the Messiah was crucified brings to life and enriches the stupendous symbolism in the Old Testament that points to the sacrifice of our Passover Lamb, and the incredibly detailed and intricate prophecies surrounding it.

Jewish author and lawyer Haim Cohn, in his book discusses the first form of crucifixion mentioned by Seneca:

In cases of crucifixion, however, the scourging was particularly elaborate: the convict was first undressed, then his head was covered, then a forked instrument with two prongs (furca) was placed on his back and his two hands bound to it, each hand to one of the prongs and thus the convict had to drag the furca to the place of crucifixion; once arrived there, he was flagellated while remaining bound to the furca. [11]

A little more information is provided by James Hastings:

It [the stipes, upright post] was erected on some spot outside the city, convenient for the execution, and remained there as a permanent fixture, only the cross-bar or patibulum being carried to the spot, usually by the person who was to suffer death. This consisted sometimes of a single piece of wood, more often of two parallel bars joined at one end, between which the head of the victim passed, and to the ends of which his hands were fastened. [12]

There are a number of factors that preclude this from being the mode of the Messiah's crucifixion: 1/. He was clothed as He walked to Golgotha; 2/. His head was not covered, allowing Him to talk to the women of Jerusalem (Luke 23:27-31); 3/. He was scourged in Jerusalem and not at the execution site; 4/. Simon of Cyrene assisted in carrying the crosspiece, indicating that the Messiah could not have been bound to it.

We saw earlier what the Roman Philosopher Seneca said about the stake or crux simplex: "...others [type of cross] transfixing them through their secret parts..." No mention is made here of nailing the victim to the stake. A New Standard Bible Dictionary states that

"this form [crux simplex] was later elaborated into the 'crux compacta,' of which there were, in the times of Christ, two varieties, the crux commissa ('St. Anthony's cross') shaped like a T, and the crux immissa (the 'Latin cross') shaped, as we generally know it, like a t." [13]

Various groups, including some of the Churches of God and the Jehovah's Witnesses, claim the Messiah was nailed to an upright stake, using two nails one for the hands and one for the feet. Is this a viable hypothesis? The Jehovah's Witnesses, as we have just seen, claim the Greek word "stauros," as found in the New Testament, can only refer to an upright stake. But is this true?

Ernest L. Martin, in his book, says NO:

"Remarkably, however, there are some religious denominations who demand that Christ was crucified on a simple upright pole or stake because that was the original meaning of the word stauros. Yes, that was the first meaning, but for such interpreters to say that "stauros" had that exclusive significance in the first century is to deny the abundant literary evidence which shows it did not...Actually, the word "stauros" in the first century could refer to all kinds of executionary impalements in which individuals were nailed or tied to any supportive timbers or trees for judgment...

"It [the word "stauros"] had at least three different meanings in the New Testament alone. Note that the board plank which supported the arms of Christ (called the patibulum in Latin) was itself called a "stauros" (Luke 23:26). But it had a further meaning. The actual pole or the tree trunk on which the "patibulum" was nailed was also called a "stauros" (John 19:19). And the whole complex together [both "patibulum" and the pole or stake reckoned as a single executionary device] was called a "stauros" (John 19:25).

"Consider this: We have seen in the medical report that the entire complex (patibulum and stake or stipes) weighed well over 300 pounds, with the patibulum itself weighing 75 to 125 pounds. This means the stake alone weighed anywhere from 175 to 225 pounds! For a man in a weakened state, such as Christ was (and let's not forget the two robbers), to carry or drag this amount of weight the more than 3,000 feet to the crucifixion site would have been well nigh impossible!

"The custom was for the stake to remain at the site of the crucifixion -- it was used over and over again! The patibulum, however, was manageable, and, as we have seen, was balanced across the nape of the neck "and balanced along both shoulders," with the outstretched arms tied to or holding it." [14]

There is something else to consider. According to the medical report in The Journal of the American Medical Association, the major effect of the crucifixion process was the interference with normal respiration or breathing:

"The weight of the body, pulling down on the outstretched arms and shoulders, would tend to fix the intercostal muscles in an inhalation state and thereby hinder passive exhalation. Accordingly, exhalation was primarily diaphragmatic, and breathing was shallow. It is likely that this form of respiration would not suffice and that hypercarbia would soon result. The onset of muscle cramps or tetanic contractions, due to fatigue and hypercarbia, would hinder respiration even further. Adequate exhalation required lifting the body by pushing up on the feet and by flexing the elbows and abducting the shoulders." [9]

This would be impossible for someone crucified to the crux simplex or stake. With the arms fully stretched above the head it would be impossible to flex the elbows and abduct the shoulders! Death by asphyxiation would quickly result.

Heart failure is also brought on by the crucifixion process. Some years ago Dr. Hermann Modder of Cologne, Germany carried out some scientific tests to determine the cause of the Messiah's death. He discovered an interesting fact:

"In the case of a person suspended by his two hands the blood sinks very quickly into the lower half of the body. After six to twelve minutes blood pressure has dropped by 50% and the pulse rate has doubled. Too little blood reaches the heart, and fainting ensues. This leads to a speedy orthostatic collapse through insufficient blood circulating to the brain and the heart. Death by crucifixion is therefore [also] due to heart failure.

"It is a well authenticated fact that victims of crucifixion did not usually die for two days or even longer. On the vertical beam there was often a small support attached called a 'sedile' (seat) or a 'cornu' (horn). If the victim hanging there eased his misery from time to time by supporting himself on this, the blood returned to the upper half of his body and the faintness passed. When the torture of the crucified man was finally to be brought to an end, the "crurifragium" was proceeded with: his legs were broken below the knee with blows from a club. That meant that he could no longer ease his weight on the footrests and heart failure quickly followed." [15]

Once again, it would be difficult for a man nailed to the crux simplex or stake, with his arms stretched out above his head, to push (and pull) himself upwards sufficiently to bring complete circulation back to the upper part of his body. With the circulation and breathing problems associated with crucifixion, the single stake type of transfixion afforded little relief and the victim died quickly. Someone crucified in this fashion could not survive more than a few hours! This, then, strongly suggests the Messiah was NOT nailed to the crux simplex or "torture stake" as the Jehovah's Witnesses and others claim.

In the summer of 1968, a discovery was made in Jerusalem that strongly indicates the common mode of crucifixion, during the time of the Messiah, was not the crux simplex or stake. During the clearing of a construction site on the hill of Givat Hamivtor on the eastern edge of the city, workers uncovered the grave of one Johanan Ben Ha'galgol. The grave and remains were dated to the time between 7 A.D. and 70 A.D.

Werner Keller, in his book The Bible as History, records what they discovered:

"It was noticed with feelings of horror that his feet were separated from the smashed skeleton and were lying one on top of the other and joined together by a rusty nail which had been driven through both feet. Fragments of wood, the remains of a wooden slab, were attached to it. Behind Johanan's feet, the nail was bent obviously by having been driven into harder material. Johanan's forearms also showed signs of having had nails [plural] driven through them. In the course of Johanan's death struggles, his skin had suffered abrasions on the nails [plural]." [16]

Finally, the Bible itself refutes the possibility of the crux simplex being used in the Messiah's execution. Notice John 20:24-25:

"Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Yeshua came. When the other disciples told him that they had seen the Lord, he declared, 'Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails [Greek: plural] were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it. "'

Ralph Woodrow, in his book, also noticed this: "The statement of Thomas about the print of nails (plural) in the hands of Jesus (John 20:25) would seem to indicate a cross piece, for on a single stake his hands would have probably been driven through with one nail." [17]

Since we have ruled out the crux simplex or stake, just WHAT was our Savior nailed to?

Let Ernest Martin answer the question:

"Many scholars today believe it is inconceivable that Christ, who had been subjected to extensive beatings and whippings, could have carried a fully assembled Latin cross that would have weighed 200 pounds or more [well over 300 pounds according to The Journal of the American Medical Association report]. This certainly had to be the case. The 'cross' he transported was only the upper crosspiece which was nailed to a larger and more substantial support. It was to this board plank that Christ's arms or his wrists were affixed, and this is what Simon of Cyrene carried the final distance to Golgotha.

"Such crosspieces associated with crucifixion were given a technical name in Latin (patibulum). When Golgotha was finally reached, Christ then had his arms or wrists nailed to the patibulum. Both he and the patibulum were then hoisted upwards and the crosspiece was nailed to some substantial stock of wood large enough to support the person being crucified. It was also common to bend the victim's legs upwards and nail the feet to the stock of wood itself." [18]

Most scholars accept this viewpoint. Notice what A Dictionary of the Bible, edited by James Hastings, has to say:

"Stau.ros means properly a stake, and is the translation not merely of the Latin crux (cross), but of palus (stake) as well. As used in the NT, however, it refers evidently not to the simple stake used for impaling, of which widespread punishment crucifixion was a refinement, but to the more elaborate cross used by the Romans in the time of Christ...The upright post to which alone the name properly belongs, was usually a piece of some strong, cheap wood, pine or oak, of such length that when firmly planted in the ground the top was from 7 1/2 to 9 ft. high...

"It was erected on some spot outside the city, convenient for the execution, and remained there as a permanent fixture, only the crossbar or patibulum being carried to the spot, usually by the person who was to suffer death. This consisted sometimes of a single piece of wood, more often of two parallel bars joined at one end, between which the head of the victim passed, and to the ends of which his hands were fastened.

"The cross which Jesus carried was doubtless simply the crossbar in one of these two forms. Keim argues in favor of the simpler, partly because Jesus is represented as clothed, which would hardly have been the case had He carried the double patibulum; partly because of the carrying of it by Simon, which he regards rather as a rude joke of the soldiers than as rendered necessary by the weight of the crossbar, which could in no case have been very heavy (Jesu von Nazara, iii. 398, Eng. tr. vi. 125)." [19]

Jewish author and lawyer Haim Cohn agrees with this:

"A milder form of castigation was for the convict to carry his own gallows to the place of execution: the verticle stake of the cross was a permanent fixture, or also ready installed beforehand for each particular execution, while the transverse bar (patibulum) was loaded on the back of the convict, for him to drag to the place of execution; in some instances he was already bound or nailed to the patibulum on his way there, in others he was allowed to carry the patibulum freely on his back and would be bound or nailed to it only there." [20]

This agrees, in the main, with Seneca's observations.

It is quite plain, therefore, that the Messiah was subjected to the milder form of crucifixion; whereby he carried only the patibulum or crosspiece.

The Epistle of Barnabas, found appended to the Codex Sinaiticus, indicates this type of crucifixion!

Notice chapter 12:

"Again, when Israel is made war upon by foreigners [Amalekites], He [YEHOVAH God] speaks to Moses; and in order to warn them [the Israelites], by means of this very war, that they had been delivered over because of their sins, the spirit suggests to Moses that he should make a type of the cross and of him who was to suffer. He thus intimates that, unless they hope in him, they will forever be subject to war. Moses, therefore, placed shield upon shield where the fray was thick; and then, standing where he towered above all the rest, he extended his arms. The result was that Israel was again victorious; then, when he lowered them [his arms], the men were again cut down. Why? They were to understand that they could not be saved unless they put their trust in Him." [21]

And how did Moses extend his arms? "And Aaron and Hur supported his [Moses'] hands, one on one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun." (Exodus 17:12). Obviously, Moses' arms were extended as if attached to a patibulum! Since the Epistle of Barnabas has been dated to the reign of Vespasian (70-79 A.D.) -- see Lightfoot and Ramsay -- then this "type of the cross" could not have been contaminated by Catholic theology! And furthermore, early Christians were known to pray with their arms extended, once again indicating the manner of the Messiah's transfixion!

The Messianic Jews claim the killing and roasting of the Passover lamb pointed to the way in which the Messiah was to be hung. In a booklet by Rivi and Danny Litvin, we find this remarkable information:

"God said that the blood of the lamb was to be spilled, and it was to be placed on the door posts and on the lintels of the home. Thus it formed the figure of the cross. The shed blood of the lamb formed a cross. But remember, the Jewish people did not know what a cross was at that time. It would become apparent only later. The cross was a pagan religious symbol which the Romans adopted. And, in a form of sacrifice to their gods, they killed their enemies on it...

"But not only was the blood of the lamb shed in the form of the cross, the lamb itself was roasted with a skewer from head to tail and another skewer from shoulder to shoulder. So again, we see the death of the Passover lamb associated with the form of a cross [patibulum and upright] pointing towards the death of Yeshua on a cross."  [22]

Now that we have established the Messiah carried the crosspiece or patibulum to Golgotha, what was it actually nailed to? Most scholars and commentators claim the patibulum was nailed to an existing pole or stake already waiting at the crucifixion site. This is absolutely correct -- in most cases! But was the Messiah nailed to a stake, along with the patibulum?

A clue to this can be found in the New Testament. Notice what the Messiah said to the women of Jerusalem on his way to the Mount of Olives and Golgotha: "For if they do these things in (dative: with) a green tree, what shall be done in (dative: with) the dry?" (Luke 23:31). A green tree -- could the Messiah, along with the patibulum, have been nailed to a living tree? Both Peter and Paul thought so! Notice Galatians 3:13: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree!"'

Paul is here quoting Deuteronomy 21:23 where it states that the Israelites in the time of Moses were to hang the dead bodies of malefactors on the bough or limbs of a tree until sundown. The "tree" in Deuteronomy meant a plain and simple tree, and other examples of this type of punishment in the Old Testament indicate that the "trees" in question were all living trees! (See Joshua 8:29; 10:26, 27).

Peter says, in I Peter 2:24, that "He [the Messiah] bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness..."

Luke bluntly states, in the book of Acts, that "The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree" (5:30). Now what could be plainer than that? In chapter 10 Luke repeats this same theme: "We are witnesses of everything he [the Messiah] did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They [the Jews] killed him by hanging him on a tree." Not content with that, Luke further says: "When they had carried out all that was written about him, They took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb" (Acts 13:29).

The word "tree," in these instances, is translated from the Greek word xylon, which can sometimes mean a dry piece of wood such as a stock or stave, and is rendered thus in Matthew 26:47, Acts 16:24 and Rev. 18:12. However, in the majority of cases it is rendered tree -- see also Rev. 2:7, 22:2, 22:14 and 22:19.

Some might argue that the word "Xylon" COULD mean that the Messiah was nailed to a dry wooden stake or post; and they could justifiably do so if we had no CONTEXT in the New Testament to show that xylon means a green tree in this particular circumstance. But we have seen that the Messiah called "xylon" a green tree right in the context of the crucifixion scene! As he was being led to Golgotha he plainly said to the women following him: "If they do these things with a green tree [xylon], what shall be done with the dry [tree]?" Yeshua is clearly showing that it was with (or by means of) a green tree (xylon) that he would meet his death. Even the Jehovah's Witnesses admit that most translations of the New Testament (in certain verses) say the Messiah died on a tree! [23]

Notice what Nancy L. Kuehl says:

"Whatever one believes, we must believe Jesus was hanged alive on a living tree. The evidence is overwhelming. From the New Covenant, we have several references to it. Never is the word xulon translated as the 'cross.' The word for 'cross' would have been stauros, and even then the Greek word only reflects the upright nature of the tree! The word xulon, however, is the same that Luke uses in 23:31 for 'moist wood' and refers to a living tree! The Hebrew equivalent would be the 'ets (derived from 'atsah), Which is also used as a term for 'gallows' in the book of Esther where Haman is 'hanged' (Esth. 5:14; 8:7).

"It is the same word used in Genesis 40:19 and Deuteronomy 21:22 to describe the hanging of an individual on a 'tree.' These 'gallows' do not refer to a Roman cross. The word is even used to describe the fruit trees of the Garden of Eden, including the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. In The New Covenant, the disciples were quite clear about how Jesus was hanged, and it wasn't upon a Roman cross. The disciples, in fact, confronted the Jewish judicial Sanhedrin later that decade with the ultimate accusation that they had hanged Jesus upon a 'living' tree." [24]

The early Christians knew that the Messiah -- along with the patibulum -- was nailed to a living tree! In the book The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art,  we find this comment:

"Of the first class [of cross], the most prominent in point of time and in importance, is the Tree of Life. 'The Tree of Life, which was planted by God in Paradise, prefigures the precious Cross,' writes Damascenus, 'for after that death was by the means of a tree, it was needful that by a tree should be given Life, and the Resurrection.'" [25]

Melito of Sardis echoed the same understanding and consistently said the "cross" of the Messiah was a tree: "Just as from a tree came sin, so also from a tree came salvation." [26]

The author of the Epistle of Barnabas also makes this indelibly clear:

"But this suffering was due to his own choice. It was ordained that he should suffer on a tree, since the inspired writer attributes to him the following words: 'Save me from the sword,' and, 'Pierce my flesh with nails, because bands of evildoers have risen against me"' (5:13).

Further on, in the eleventh chapter, any doubt that may remain is completely dashed:

"Let us now inquire whether the Lord took pains to hint in advance at the water and the Cross...He says in another Prophet: "He who does these things will resemble the tree planted by running waters: it yields its fruit in its season, nor does its leaf fall off; what ever he does will prosper"...Note how at the same time He describes the water and the Cross. This is what He means: Blessed are those who, fixing their hope on the Cross, have descended into the water; for by the words 'in its season' He refers to the reward; then, He means, I will pay it.

"For the present, however, this is what He means by the words 'its leaf does not fall': every word that passes your lips in faith and love will be for many a means of conversion and hope...He also describes the cross in another Prophet, who says: 'And when will these things be accomplished? The Lord says: "When a tree is felled and rises again, and when blood trickles from the tree."' Once more you have a hint of the Cross and of he who was to be crucified!"

In chapter eight, the author of Barnabas mentions the sacrifice of the Red Heifer, and states that the priests tied a crimson thread to a tree which represented the cross of the Messiah!

What could be clearer? The Messiah was nailed to a living tree!!

The Book of Exodus mentions the occasion when Moses was told by YEHOVAH God to

"Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole [standard, upright support]; and it shall be that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and put it on a pole [standard, upright support]; and so it was, if a serpent had bitten anyone, when he looked at the bronze serpent, he lived." (21:89).

What's so significant about this? "And as Moses lifted up [on the "upright support"] the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up." (John 3:14). The WAY the serpent was set on the upright support was to be indicative of how the Messiah was attached to his "upright support." And what exactly was Moses' serpent attached to?

Let us go to the Epistle of Barnabas again:

"Moreover, after Moses had commanded them, 'You shall have neither a carved nor a molten [cast] statue for your God,' yet he makes one himself to show a type of Jesus. Moses, therefore, made a carved serpent, and set it up conspicuously, and called together the people by proclamation. So they came together and begged Moses to offer a prayer for their recovery. But Moses said to them, 'Whenever one of you,' he said, 'is bitten, let him come to the serpent that is placed on the tree, and let him hope and believe that, though dead, the serpent is able to vivify, and he shall immediately be saved.'" -- 12:67.

What could be more conclusive?

There is even more evidence that the Messiah was nailed to a living tree in the second-century work of Ignatius. In his letter to the Smyrnians, he refers to the cross (stauros) as a tree -- one so alive it even bore fruit! (Smyr. 1:2). In his letter to the Trallians (verse 11), he uses the following analogy:

"Shun these wildlings, then, which bear but deadly fruit, and when one tastes it, he is outright doomed to die! Surely, such persons are not the planting of the Father. For if they were they would appear as branches of the cross, and their fruit would be imperishable -- the Cross through which by His Passion He calls you to Him, being members of His body."

Ignatius also says that it was believed "that the instrument of death on which Christ was crucified represented 'the Tree of Life' which was mentioned in the Book of Revelation (Rev. 2:7; 22:2,14), and, of course, that Tree of Life was a living xylon (tree) just as the apostles Peter and Paul said Christ was crucified on a similar xylon (tree)." [27]

If we turn to Jeremiah 11:19, we read the following:

"But I was like a docile lamb brought to the slaughter; and I did not know that they had devised schemes against me, saying, 'let us destroy the tree with its fruit, and let us cut him off from the land of the living, that his name may be remembered no more.'"

This prophecy shows that the tree and the person on the tree would be destroyed together and, although the original teaching of this Old Testament prophecy seemed to refer to the prophet Jeremiah, Jerome (early church father ?340-420 A.D.) claims it refers to the Messiah!

Notice what The Anglican Commentary says about this very verse:

"Jerome well says on this verse, "All the churches agree in understanding that under the person of Jeremiah these things are said of Christ. For he is the lamb brought to the slaughter that opened not its mouth. The tree is his [the Messiah's] cross, and the bread [fruit] his body: for he says himself, 'I am the bread that came down from heaven.' And of him they purposed to cut him off from the land of the living that his name should no more be remembered." [28]

So Who Actually Nailed the Messiah to the Tree?

In John 19 we read:

"Then Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And Pilate said to them, 'Behold the Man!' Therefore, when the chief priests and officers [Temple guard] saw him, they cried out, saying, 'Crucify him, crucify him!' Pilate said to them [chief priests, Temple guards], 'You take him and crucify him, for I find no fault in him.' The Jews [chief priests, Temple guard] answered him, 'We have a law, and according to our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God'...

"From then on Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews [chief priests, Temple guard] cried out, saying, 'If you let this man go, you are not Caesar's friend. Whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar'...Now it was the Preparation Day of the Passover, and about the sixth hour. And he [Pilate] said to the Jews [chief priests, Temple guard], 'Behold your King!' But they [chief priests, Temple guard] cried out, 'Away with him, away with him! Crucify him!'...So he [Pilate] delivered him [the Messiah] to them [Jews, chief priests, Temple guards] to be crucified. So they [chief priests, Temple guard] took Jesus and led him away [to be crucified]" (John 19:5-15, NKJV).

Furthermore, in Acts 4, we read:

"And it came to pass, on the next day, that their [the peoples'] rulers, elders, and scribes, as well as Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the family of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem...Then Peter, filled with the holy spirit, said to them, 'Rulers of the people and elders of Israel:..let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you [rulers, elders, etc.] crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man stands here before you whole" (Acts 4:5-10, NKJV).

Notice that Peter makes a clear distinction between the elders, scribes, the high priest, etc., and the people of Israel. This leads us to the conclusion that these rulers, etc., were not Israelites!

Many have speculated that the Pharisees who rejected the Messiah were necessarily racial Edomites, and this is reinforced by the Pharisees' conversation with the Messiah in John Chapter 8. Here the Pharisees give us an astounding piece of information that is vital to a proper understanding of who they were:

"We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man" (John 8:33).

The Pharisees here state that they were descended from Abraham, but had never been in bondage. However, we know that all Israel was in bondage in Egypt (Exodus 1:1-5,13-14). Therefore, the Pharisees could not be Israelites. The Messiah, but a few verses later, actually confirms what they say:

"I know that ye are Abraham's seed...[but]...If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham" (John 8:37, 39).

The Messiah accepts their claim of descent from Abraham, but says that they are not "Abraham’s children". What does he mean by the expression "Abraham's children"? Paul provides us with a full explanation of it in Romans 9:

"For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed" (Romans 9:6-8).

Although they were called “Jews,” a term which is derived from the word “Judah,” these people were not true Judahites but became a mixed or hybridized people, consisting of Edomites, Hittites, Canaanites, Judahites, Babylonians, Ishmaelites, etc.

Nancy Kuehl, in her in depth study of the execution of the Messiah, goes on to state:

"That the execution [of the Messiah] was a Jewish affair, we have verification in Acts 4:9, where the rulers of Israel are confronted with the execution of Jesus. There is just no getting around the fact that the entire process was a Jewish affair from beginning to end, and it is the only conclusion we can draw from the Talmudic writings, which speak nothing of the Romans." [29]

We read the following passage in the Babylonian Talmud that proves Kuehl's point:

"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu [the Messiah] was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He [the Messiah] is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy...he was hanged on the ever of the Passover! [Nisan 14.]" [30]

The Slavonic version of Josephus agrees with this assessment -- notice!

"And when thereafter news of it was brought to the Jewish leaders, they assembled together with the high priest and said, 'We are powerless and (too) weak to resist the Romans [at which time they communicate their desires to Pilate who]...pronounced (this) judgment: 'He is (a benefactor, but not) a malefactor (nor) a rebel (nor) coveteous of king(ship)'...The scribes (therefore) being stung with envy gave Pilate thirty talents to kill him. And he [Pilate] took (it) and gave them [chief priests, Temple guard] liberty to carry out their will (themselves). And they [chief priests, Temple guard] took him [the Messiah] and crucified him [i.e., hanged him on a tree alive] contrary to the law of (their) fathers." [31]

Nancy Kuehl adds to this by saying:

"All these documents were written by Jews. There is no reason for them to have contrived such 'fantasies' concerning Israel's involvement in the arrest and execution of Jesus, especially in light of the tendency toward anti-Semitic persecution of Jews by the universal church of the latter first century and onward. Quite simply, the arrest (and execution) was entirely a Jewish affair. There is little doubt that both Herod (as reigning royal ruler) and the Sanhedrin (the legislative body of Israel) had already identified Jesus as a wanted man and were only awaiting their opportunity to seize him in Jerusalem." [32]

After the Messiah's resurrection, Luke makes this statement about the execution:

"But our high priests and leaders handed him [the Messiah] over to be condemned to death, and they [high priests and leaders] had him crucified" (Luke 24:20, The One God, the Father, One Man Messiah Translation).

All the earliest documents clearly indicate that it was the Edomite Sanhedrin who "crucified" the Messiah. "If Pilate, himself," notes Nancy Kuehl, "had intended to have Jesus crucified in the Roman fashion, there would have been no reason for him to deliver Jesus up to the Sanhedrin. The plain fact is the rulers [high priests and leaders] stood to lose both their positions of power and their personal wealth. They wanted Jesus out of the picture so that they might continue the graft of the Temple Cult; Pilate did not. In his own mind, it would have made little difference whether the king of Israel was Herod Antipas or Jesus. The disputes over a royal lineage within the weakened Judea would have been irrelevant to him, a moot point." [33]

Although Pilate had sent a representation of Roman soldiers (see Mark 15:39) to be present at the execution site to keep law and order, it was NOT the Roman soldiers who nailed the Messiah to the tree: it was the Temple captains or guards. John 19:16-18 clearly states that it was the Edomite Jewish authorities who executed the Messiah -- notice!

"So he [Pilate] delivered him to them [chief priests, Temple guards] to be crucified. So they [chief priests, Temple guards] took Jesus and led him away...where they [chief priests, Temple guards] crucified him, and two others with him, one on either side, and Jesus in the middle."

Conclusion

We have seen, in this article, how the modern conception of the cross (two pieces of dead wood or a simple stake) DOES NOT represent the instrument of the Messiah's death. We have also seen that the Savior of Israel was nailed, along with the patibulum he carried out of the eastern gate of the Temple to the Mount of Olives, to a living tree at Golgotha by the Temple guard or captains -- along with the two robbers who were crucified on the same tree he was.

Footnotes:

[1] Armstrong, Garner Ted, The Real Jesus, Sheeed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., Kansas City, 1977, pp. 237-238.

[2] The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, by the New World Bible Translation Committee, 1969. Appendix p.1155.

[3] Reicke, Bo, The New Testament Era, Fortress Press, Philadelphia. 1968, pages 185-187.

[4] Encyclopedia Britannica (1943 edition), Vol. 6, p. 753.

[5] Seymour, William F., The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art, pp. 22, 26.

[6] The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, p. 517, article: "Cross."

[7] Seymour, William F., The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art, p. 26.

[8] The Pentateuch Examined, Vol. 6, p. 113.

[9] "A Medical Report On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ," William D. Edwards, Wesley J. Gabel and Floyd E. Hosmer, The Journal of the American Medical Association, 1986.

[10] Seneca, Consol. ad Marciam, XX.

[11] Cohn, Haim, The Trial and Death of Jesus, -- KTAV Publishing House, New York. 1977, pages 376-377.

[12] Hastings, James, A Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. I. Edinburgh: T.& T. Clark, 1951, p. 528.

[13] A New Standard Bible Dictionary, edited by Jacobs, Nourse and Zenos, N.Y. & London, 1926, p.160.

[14] Martin, Ernest L., Secrets of Golgotha: The Forgotten History of Christ's Crucifixion, ASK Publications Alhambra, California, 1988.

[15] Keller, Werner, The Bible as History, William Morrow and Company, Inc. New York 1981, pages 348-349.

[16] Ibid., p. 352.

[17] Woodrow, Ralph, Babylon Mystery Religion: Ancient and Modern, p. 53.

[18] Martin, Ernest L., Secrets of Golgotha: The Forgotten History of Christ's Crucifixion, ASK Publications Alhambra, California, 1988, pp. 169-170.

[19] Hastings, James, A Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. I. Edinburgh: T.& T. Clark, 1951, p. 528.

[20] Cohn, Haim, The Trial and Death of Jesus, -- KTAV Publishing House, New York. 1977, pages 376-377, note 25.

[21] Ancient Christian Writers: The Works of the Fathers in Translation, edited by Quasten and Plumpe. Verses 2-3.

[22] Litvin, Rivi and Danny, Let Us Celebrate the Feast, Hope of Israel Ministries (HIM), Covina, CA, p. 23.

[23] "Make Sure of All Things Hold Fast To What Is True," Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. Brooklyn, New York, 1965, page 140.

[24] Kuehl, Nancy L., A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 199.

[25] Seymour, William W. The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art, The Knickerbocker Press, N.Y. & London. 1898, p. 47.

[26] Melito of Sardis, New fragment, III. 4.

[27] Martin, Ernest L., Secrets of Golgotha: The Forgotten History of Christ's Crucifixion, ASK Publications Alhambra, California, 1988, p. 174.

[28] The Anglican Commentary, Vol. V, p.395.

[29] Kuehl, Nancy L., A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 71.

[30] Babylonian Talmud, b. Sanh. 43a.

[31] Schonfield, Hugh J., The Slavonic Josephus, p. 162.

[32] Kuehl, Nancy L., A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 72.

[33] Ibid., p.149.

Hope of Israel Ministries -- Taking the Lead in the Search for Truth!

Hope of Israel Ministries P.O. Box 853 Azusa, CA 91702, U.S.A. www.hope-of-israel.org

Scan with your Smartphone for more information