STAKE . . . or . . . CROSS . . . or BOTH ?

Cross or Stake . . . or BOTH ?

A stake, say many in The Hebrew Roots community and among the Jehovah Witnesses, was the instrument of death used by the Romans in the crucifixion of The LORD Y'SHU+ the M'SHIKHA, YESHUA+ ha MOSHIYACH.

A stake, it is correctly pointed out, is the basic meaning of the Greek “cross” word, stauros, and is always rendered "cross" in English translations. The verb form means "to impale" or put to death on a stake. Some call it a "gibbet", which would be likened to a gallows.

These factions blame the Roman Catholics for foisting the word “CROSS” upon the  Christian world via their Vulgate version by using the word “CRUX” instead of “stake.” A close examination of the facts will clearly reveal the TRUTH of the matter. 

So . . . let us look at the facts. 

The Netzarim bible, the Aramaic-English New Testament edited by Andrew Roth, changes "cross" to “stake” or "torture stake" at will in his version except at Matthew 10:38.  

In his version, that same Aramaic word translated as “stake”

__ܙܩܺܝܦ݂ܶܗ__

[ Z’QiPeh ] ***

becomes a "staff" to rule over one's enemies ( ! ? ) instead of being an instrument bringing death to Self. [ See that verse and its footnote #107, pg. 28, mis-paginated edition. ] 

***For more Aramaic details on the Aramaic word for CROSS, see the end of this article. 

A cross, say many among the Eastern and Western branches of Christianity, is the correct translation.  

A cross, as it is unmistakably pointed out, was historically established in the Early Christian writings.

What is the TRUTH of the matter ?

The pictures show us . . .

We do not seem to have "Christian" pictures from the 100 or 200 AD. The later ones we do have --- in rock or upon burial items --- generally show a fish, bread, a chi-Rho , or an anchor. 

In the 300's AD we start to see cross representations of one sort or another. 

By the 400's , we have mosaic pictures of Christian sisters, one a Gentile Christian and the other a Jewish Christian sister.  They both wore long veilings and totally modest, long, dark gowns and had simple white sashes --- with a cross embroidered in the sash. 

This was long before the Roman Catholic church tried to establish itself as the head of all Christian churches in 1054 AD.

The Early Christian writers and apologists tell us . . .

They tell us a lot ! See the coming post to read the writings of the Early Christians about the sign of the Cross. . . long before the Roman Catholic church as we know it today came into existence, circa 1054 AD.

Secular History records for us . . .

The Romans did NOT impale, but rather, they crucified their victims, criminals of the lowest sort. Historical accounts include all manner of horrible variations in the way a victim was crucified . . . May The LORD have mercy on our sin-filled human race !  

The Roman cross was a public gallows which had a sedile in the middle to support the body. The Orthodox affirm there was a  footrest at the bottom to which the feet were nailed. 


 The Orthodox crosses depict this footrest. 

Some accounts say that the POLE or timber (stipes) used to hold the cross was established at the crucifixion site. It may have been notched, to receive the cross-beam ( patibulum ) more securely. 

Then, the criminal or victim was marched through the streets of Jerusalem with a cross-beam of wood on his back as an example for all, as the Roman soldiers led him to the place of crucifixion.

In the artist's drawing above, the victim is shown without the horrific shredding of skin and muscle of his body by the Roman scourging.

Likely, not only his back but his arms and chest and legs would have received the blows from the whip. Signs of this complete laceration are on the Shroud of Turin. 

The ropes would have been necessary to keep the cross-beam upon his shoulders after such a scourging, for his arms and hands would have been useless by this time. [ May the LORD have mercy upon our souls, for it was our sins which were at the root of this scourging. ]  

Prophetic Scripture depicts this binding of the Sacrifice: 

GOD is the LORD, which hath shewed us Light:

bind the Sacrifice with cords,

even unto the horns of the altar.

Psalm 118:27

This is a prophetic Psalm; Hebrew Temple sacrifices were NOT tied to the horns of the altar. 

Scripture very early confirms the wood of his death being carried on the shoulders of The LORD. As a prophetic picture, Isaac carried his "death" wood upon his back also, as he and his father Abraham walked to the appointed Mt. Moriah. 

The Conclusion of the Matter

It seems, in the light of the evidence, that BOTH parties are partially correct: they both see SOME PART of the Crucifixion instrument of death. 

The LORD was affixed to a stake, but not impaled. There was a cross-beam attached to it. 

According to Scripture, there were 2 nails for the hands, not one ( as it would be if impaled.) 

The other disciples therefore said unto HIM+,

 We have seen the LORD!

 But HE+ said unto them,

Except I shall see in His+ Hands

the print of the nails,

and 

put my finger into the print of the nails,

and thrust my hand into His+ Side,

I will not believe.

John 20:25

HE+ was FIRST nailed to the cross BEAM, which THEN was affixed to the stake or pole or timber (stipes ). His+ Precious Feet were then nailed to the stake. 

There may have been a notch or bracket into which the cross-beam would have been affixed to the Pole or timber.  

This would agree with the integrity of the Scriptures, using "stauros" in the Greek and

 __ܙܩܺܝܦ݂ܶܗ_

[ Z’QiPeh ]

in the Aramaic, as the stout stake, timber, or pole of the cross.

It would also explain the Early Christian writings, written well before the Roman Church exerted a monopoly on Western Christianity, after the Council of Nicea. 

The Church at Rome, as seen in the Apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans, was NOT a “Latin High church.” 

[ Next post will review the Early Christian writings which refer plainly and distinctly to the Cross --- not stake --- before or just following the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. ] 

The Christian Church which existed at Rome during the first 300 years did NOT change the concept of a "stake", the stauros, of the Greek Manuscripts into a "cross". 

The Latin word for cross is "crux." During the translation of Scriptures from Greek to Latin, the Latin writers used "crux" because of the "cross" beam affixed to the stake, the stauros. 

According to the Early Christian writers ( circa 200 AD ), it was common knowledge that the “cross” referred to the entire instrument of execution , which would have included both the CROSS-beam and the STAKE.   

It would also explain why Eastern Christianity, which was generally untouched by the Western church customs, adopted the Cross as the emblem of CHRIST'S crucifixion long before 1054 AD, when the Latin Church tried to dominate Christianity.

 

Signifying the Cross-beam attached to the Stake, with the title board nailed above it, is why the Early Church would bless using the sign of the cross ... and that sign would include BOTH the cross-beam AND the stake.

The Western Church and the Eastern Church made the sign of the Cross in various ways . . . but they all practiced it, according to the Early Church writers. [ See the next post regarding the Cross in the Early Church writings. ]

+  +  +

*** The Aramaic-English New Testament states that the Aramaic word for “cross” is not “cross” at all but STAKE.

 However, here is the analysis of the Aramaic Word 

 ܙܩܺܝܦ݂ܶܗ

[ Z’QiPeh ]

from the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (CAL) of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. This is found at their website and also from Dukhrana.com, which is the link here.

Dukhrana.com

 

   zqyp A02

zqyp (zqīp̄) adj. erect; the Cross

G p.p. but in poetry alsoܙܲܩܝܼܦ ‏

  1 erect, high Com. --(a) tumid Syr.
  2 crucified, hanged Syr, JBA.
  3 difficult, cruel Syr.
  4 as a substantive: erect structure for execution OfA-Pers, Syr. --(a) cross, The Cross Syr. --(b) gallows Syr, JBA. --(c) execution JBA.
  5 (gram.) pronounced with zqāp̄ā Syr.

NOTICE THIS: “ Stake “ is not listed by CAL as a translation for ZQiPeh , in the Syriac or Jewish Biblical Aramaic dialects. The other abbreviations used in the above CAL entry is Com = Common Palestinian Aramaic, and OfA-Per = Official Aramaic -- Persian.

+  +  +