Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spamandham · 08-23-2008, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thentian

The romans crucified thousands long before Jesus' time. Couldn't the expression simply have originated from this practice, especially if it was their custom to let the victim carry his own cross to the site where he was to be executed?

Sure, that could be the case as well, but I guess I'm looking for textual references that can help determine the original source of the idea.

mountainman · 08-23-2008, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by thentian

The romans crucified thousands long before Jesus' time. Couldn't the expression simply have originated from this practice, especially if it was their custom to let the victim carry his own cross to the site where he was to be executed?

Sure, that could be the case as well, but I guess I'm looking for textual references that can help determine the original source of the idea.

Keep looking spamandham.

Best wishes

Pete

Solo · 08-24-2008, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Reading through the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, generally dated to the mid-2nd century, I find in chapter 6:

(3) Replying, Joseph said to him, "Nobody except God can subordinate this child. Do not consider him to be a small cross, brother."

(4) As Jesus heard Joseph saying this, he laughed and said to Zacchaeus, "Really, teacher, what my father has said to you is true. (5) I am the Lord of this people and am here in your presence and have been born among you and am with you. (6) I know where you are from and how many years there will be in your lives. I am telling you the truth, teacher, when you were born, I existed. And if you want to be a perfect teacher, listen to me and I will teach you wisdom which nobody knows except me and the one who sent me to you. (7) For you are my disciple and I know you, how old you are and how old you will live to be. (8) And when you see the cross my father has described, you will believe that everything I have said to you is true."

What cross is this? From whence does the expression originate? Surely the author would realize that 'to bear a cross' is a gross anachronism in reference to the child Jesus, if the origin of cross symbolism was Jesus' crucifixion! Doesn't the author's usage of such expressions imply that the author did not make any connection between the cross in the gospel stories, and the cross he was describing? The author seems to be using the cross as a general metaphor for 'burden'.

Does the author of IGT unlock the mystery of his own odd "cross" reference for us, and possibly also clue us into early cross symbolism altogether, while also neatly explaining the Gospels' carpenter references...

Chapter 13:
(1) Since his father was a carpenter, he was making plows and yokes in that season. (2) An order for a bed was given to him from a rich man, (3) but one of the boards, the one called the crossbeam, was shorter than the other. And since Joseph had no idea what to do, the child Jesus said to his father Joseph, "Put the two pieces of wood down and line up the ends...."

Does the earliest cross symbolism language originate in the idea of a cross beam that is the focus of bearing structural weight, rather than in the symbolism of death and torture? Was the idea of a cross bearing a burden already popular symbolism prior to the Gospel (or historical crucifixion if you prefer)?

This idea is reiterated in Matthew 10:38 "and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me." Clearly, the reference is to bearing a load rather than to Roman crucifixion. (also Matthew 16:24, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23 and 14:24, interestingly, John - the last of the canonical Gospels - has omitted these 2nd interpretation references to carrying a cross).

If we accept early datings for Mark, how can we explain 8:34 without realizing that the idea of the cross being a symbol of load bearing was already well known at the earliest points of Christianity?

It was well known, I would say, because Paul supplied it. I believe that the cross symbology (irrespective of whether some crucifixion metaphors existed before Paul) originates with him. The cross looks like a uniquely Pauline paradox through which he articulated the redemptive "power" of suffering, his own and those who were similarly afflicted. For Paul it was not yet "human suffering" generally but the pains of the elect who were "in Christ", who were called to be "saints" and judge the world. The base of the cross idiom is set in 1 Cr 2:

1 Cr 2:2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power,

this psychological imitatio Christi Paul proclaimed as a general rule of transference:

Rom 6:6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with,* that we should no longer be slaves to sin.

It was Paul who used the event of crucifixion relating to an actual, historical event as a mystical descriptor of his depressive psychosis. This "explanation" for the mysterious afflictions and feelings of persecution he and his friends experienced were apprehended as the witness to, or the spiritual equivalent of, the physical suffering of Jesus:

Gal 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Gal 6:14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.

That the Pauline "crucified" Jesus was not the norm in the Jesus-professing communities is apparent from a number of Paul's statements and assertions:

1 Cr 1:17-18 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel-not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (cf 1 Cr 15:50-57)

Gal 5:11 Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished.

Gal 6:12 Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ.

Paul freely cross-references the physical act of crucifixion (as a common referent for the verses above) with his own internal experiences, simply because he convinced himself (and as of 2008 A.D. more than a billion humans on the planet) the two were related by revelation from God.

So, in my scheme of things, the gospel references to the cross elaborate the Pauline axiom, which in the earliest communities signified the "burden" of witnessing Jesus through the Spirit, and confirmed the genuineness of the experience. Later, of course, the cross came to convey the mutual off-loading of misery between the believer and the Redeemer. In the Christian optimistic view of life's purpose the labour was divided thus: You carry his cross, he'll die for your sins.

Jiri

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.