Koyaanisqatsi

Here's a fun one I haven't seen cult members deal with of late:

Discuss.

But don't try to state that Jesus wasn't dead ("slew") prior to being displayed on a tree (which is, by no means, a crucifix) without just cause.

CodeMason

Typing that phrase into google, including the quotations, yields some interesting results.

Liquidrage

Get off the cross, we need the wood.

Echo

Isn't this why JWs believe Jesus was hung on a stake?

critical thinking made ez

Acts has a wealth of like problems for Christians. It would be in their best interest to cut that book out of the line-up too. It actually makes up an entirely different Christian religion.

I love Chapter 2 where all the Apostles think they are in the actual end-times and await the sun to darken and the moon to turn to blood and expect Christ’s return any "moment". Way to go Apostles, so we should believe the rest of your delusions too?

If God exists, can't we expect him/her/it to get its story correct?

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: critical thinking made ez ]</p>

Koyaanisqatsi

I actually got into a two hour long fight (read: extremely heated discussion) with a good friend of mine over this. He's a son of a preacher man from the South and he literally tried to explain to me for two hours how being killed and then hung on a tree was the same thing "back then" as being crucified on a crucifix.

Two hours...many whiskeys...wouldn't budge.

Their own book tells them it's all a pack of lies and they look straight in your eyes and say, "no it doesn't."

Just incredible.

Toto

This thread provides proof of Jung's theories of serendipity. I finally decided to read Freke and Gandy's Jesus Mysteries and when I saw this thread I had just read the part about the number of pagan gods who died, were hung in a tree (before or after dying, if you're into myths these little details shouldn't bother you), and then were resurrected.

First of all, the reference to a "tree" in Acts (and in Galatians) probably comes from the Old Testament, where punishment involved stoning a person and then hanging their body in a tree:

Galatians 3:13
Deuteronomy 21:23
F&G agree that the word "cross" in the Bible is a word that can be translated as "stake". They have an image of Bacchus crucified on a cross that dates to about 300 C.E., and they claim that there were no images of Jesus on a cross before the 5th century. The cross was an ancient sacred symbol in Platonic and mystery practice, so it would be natural for Christians to appropriate it.

In the Attis mysteries, a youthful image of the godman Attis was hung in a pine tree. Adonis was known as "he in a tree". In the mysteries of Dionysus, a large bearded mask of Dionysus was hung on a wooden pole, with a number of other details that resemble the Christian myth. Orpheus may also have been crucified.

Plato refers to "a just man crucified", which seems to be a common theme in classical times. Plato also refers to desires as nails that hold the body to its lower desires.

F&G don't even mention Wotan, who hung himself in a tree for 10 days.

This is all supposed to be symbolic of the death of the lower (physical) self and the rebirth of the higher (spiritual) self (F&G's theory), unless it is symbolic of some hallucinogenic herb that grows in the trees and was used in the mystery cults.

I realize that F&G do not have a perfect record for accuracy, so I assume that some Christian will be able to point out any flaws in their history.

(BTW - I think this thread really belongs in BC&A.)

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Toto ]</p>

Tercel

Ah, the many joys of the King James Versions...
The greek (word for word) reads here:
"The God of the fathers of us raised Jesus, whom ye killed hanging on a tree"
More astute readers will note that the "and" between "killed" and "hanging" which is causing problems is in fact an addition by the translators of the KJV. All other translations I could lay my hands on add the word "by" there instead - making much more sense of the Greek and solving one of the supposed problems.

Toto has already quoted a verse relevant for the other question:
"for everyone that is hanged on a tree is cursed of God" -Deut 21:23
By the time of Jesus, the Jewish tradition had transferred this curse to death by crucifixion. Thus accroding to this tradition Jesus' death on the cross was seen as him coming under the curse of God. This would probably have been interpreted by most people at the time as proof that God was against him - which was most probably the intention of the Pharisees in their demands that he be (specifically) crucified rather than simply killed.
Paul calls his preaching of a crucified Christ "a stumbling block to the Jews" (1 Corintians 1:23)
And in Galations Paul uses the curse of the Cross in one of his arguments against justification by works:
All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."
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." (Galations 3:10,13)

Tercel

Koyaanisqatsi

Great, all of which means that Christ was killed while hanging on a tree, not a crucifix. Which in turn means that Jesus had no cross to bear and whatshisname (Simon, was it?) would not have been able to carry Jesus' cross for him, since it would not be possible to carry a tree, then plant it in order for Jesus be killed whilst hanging from it.

You'll have to do a hell of a lot better than that, dear friend, to make this passage reconcilable with the crucifixion stories (no matter what version you wish to hide behind).

Photocrat

LOL. This has been commented on for ages ...

Ask most any Jew, being crucified most certainly *was* counted as being hung on a tree...

Dollars to doughnuts you can't tell me why the Jews, especially anti-missionaries, would say that without looking it up, first :] [Hint: it's burried deep within the OT & is the far more common version of this arguement--one which is actually somewhat more interesting from a theological perspective :]

Yes, Toto is right [partially] about the origens--it *is* a reference to that bit of the OT.

Now then, F&G's "imperfect" record? LOL :]

If they *really* want to look something up, they will note that worshipping a 'crucified felon' [which is, unfortunately the 1st cent. mindset of that] would *not* be reasonable. This really does belong on BC&A, though, if we want to go there.

Heck, the whole "dying-rising god" nonsense is spurious to begin with. Please explain how Jesus connects to 'corn spirits' who represent the crop cycle... I really want to know, because I think it's silly... :] I would be a tiny bit more skeptical of the foundations of that theory, especially when it is founded on assumptions like all cultures going through the same evolutionary paths & such. Please support that with modern anthropology :]