Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Concerning the Cross and the Pole
#1
This is an email I sent to AENT, but I haven't recieved a response, so I suppose it may have been the wrong people to send it to, and since the editor of the AENT browses these forums, I thought perhaps I would copy and paste it here. Please bear in mind this was written in a hurry, but nonetheless, contains the message and questions I have concerning the issue between the cross and the pole.

Quote:I just wanted to bring this up and hope that some more detail might be presented to shed light on the subject of the pole vs the cross. I've done a brief study on the Romans and have found that they used 4 different ways to crucify (crux) or torture those they put to death in this way. I've found that they used a T, t, X and I shaped tool for this work, and while the original language does indeed mean a pole, should we not take into account that while Moshe did indeed lift a serpent upon a pole, that this was merely a shadow of things to come and doesn't have to mean literally the shape upon which Mashiyach was put to death upon? And following this same line of thinking, shouldn't we take into account that the Romans we're of pagan origin, therefore their tools weren't Hebrew by any means, thus making the cross a possible truth? And on another note, what archeological evidence do we have which supports either an I or a t that he was murdered upon, or even an X or T for that matter? Don't get me wrong, I want truth as much as you, so I'm willing to listen and be taught, but with that said, what evidence is present other than the meaning of the ancient texts, that very well may meant a pole (as in I) or something likened to this I pole? Please forgive me, this message is well written, I've done the best I can, I'm just wanting clarification and perhaps evidence to support one view or another. I am called by Elohim to carry a cross, or more specifically the t-shape cross, and I don't believe I was inspired by a pagan spirit to do so, and looking at the fruit from others who have done so in the past, carrying the same object, have to take a step back and wonder if in all of this concern for meaning behind the pole vs the cross if we're straining the gnats but swallowing the camels. If the pole upon which Moshe lifted the serpent upon was a shadow, who's to say that the cross which Christians use as another shadow (while many Christians, but especially Catholics use it as a symbol of authority or mysticism, matters not in my context, as I'm speaking for those of us that see it as a shadow of things to come) of the same pole of Moshe? Meh, I have to stop, I'm no scholar and my writing is very disorganized right now.

Shalom... and thank you for your translation, it has been a valuable tool to my family and I,
Jonathan Elijah
Reply
#2
I think you might have missed where I was going with that post. I was trying to make sense of the arguments I seemed to have picked up on in AGR's works talking about the pole, and how the cross is 'pagan,' and even arguments I have heard from others, which may have been zealous to the point that the image of the cross is in itself against Elohim, being a pagan image of 'sun worship.' Anywho, the whole thing I was hoping was to find some sense of meaning behind the arguments I have heard from people about the cross.

Maybe I'm straining the gnats and swallowing the camels. I just don't want to be misguided or mislead by deception, as I have been for so long following the Christian teachings, but I'm a Levite, and zealous for the truth, just unequipped to really search these things out in the original languages. Oh, if I could just take the time to learn Hebrew and Aramaic, and get my hands on digital copies of the various ancient of texts. The time will come.
Reply
#3
Interestingly enough:

http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1770

and

Quote:Israel Today was given access to many of the rabbi's manuscripts, written in his own hand for the exclusive use of his students. Most striking were the cross-like symbols painted by Kaduri all over the pages. In the Jewish tradition, one does not use crosses. In fact, even the use of a plus sign is discouraged because it might be mistaken for a cross.



I suppose so much of my confusion is from being introduced to the Sacred Name movement, and hearing arguments such as I said in my last reply, so am being stirred to investigate and meditate upon the many things I have encountered, especially not to be led astray by cunning words or fruitless arguments, for the first time over the last couple of months.
Reply
#4
Just thought it interesting that sin came through a tree,or by adam and eve eating from the tree which god told them not to eat from. Then God decided to redeem us by hanging on a tree' "but when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son who, born of a woman, become subject to the law to redeem them who were under the law'.
Reply
#5
Rafa, AGR isn't the only person with this viewpoint, though, so there understanding of the original language isn't totally unfounded. This is one reason why I am pursuing this issue more. AGR translates a verse which has been well known to say 'take up your cross and follow Me,' to 'take up your staff and follow Me.' Please note that I didn't bring this Scripture up as a pivot of further discussion, just an example of differences in the language and translation.
Reply
#6
Shlama,


there is nothing wrong with the cross. if you want great evidence for this, look into the real Hebrew alphabet, what is known as the Old Negev. everything else is influenced from the Aramaic letter constructions.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ancient-hebrew.org/3_home.html">http://ancient-hebrew.org/3_home.html</a><!-- m -->

look at the letter TAW. it is clearly a cross, and this is the form of Hebrew used BEFORE the Exodus events, so it predates PaleoHebrew, which was influenced by the Aramaics script.

as it developed, the letter forms changed. other cultures took the "cross" shape and did use them for their own pagan purposes, but let's be clear: it is IN the alphabet of the most ancient Hebrew ever found, so don't be swayed by the things you hear in the Sacred Name movement. i've been intimately involved with that community for many years, and i can say that although there is great and sincere zeal for the Word, the movement is simply fraught with very poor scholarship and a tendency to promote these errors without looking into them to see if they are correct or not.

i myself am "Hebrew-Roots," if i must be labeled, so i am not against the SN movement per se, but simply see the reality of the situation. sure the cross has been used by pagans, but what of it? where's the issue? stars and planets and all manner of things have been corrupted by pagans for their use, but they still are creations that belong to the Creator, so let us not take an attitude that they are evil or perverse simply because they have been "adopted" by pagans.

the cross sign is not wicked, or you have to say that the most ancient form of Hebrew -- indeed, the only TRUE form of Hebrew letters that we have, have been infected with paganism. try not to put something that developed later back on something that came prior, and was in use in the Hebrew alphabet.


i hope that helps clear things up. keep seeking the truth!


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply
#7
Thank you for your responses, they do indeed clear things up for me.

As far as the SN movement goes, I choose not to affiliate with it, although have been greatly blessed by the revelation and knowledge given me through the Ruach haKodesh concerning the identity and sacredness of Elohim's name, which I learned by being introduced to their teaching on this matter. I also refuse to be identified with any movement, really, and actually am seekign to return to my Hebrew roots as well, especially since some 2 years ago I had a vision from Adonai telling me I was actually a Hebrew. While I don't have DNA proof or genealogical proof for this, I would rather stand on the vision before anything else.

Again, thanks for your response, it has been most helpful.
Reply
#8
Rafa Wrote:Something interesting : according to the Zohar, the letter TAW was the mark placed on Cain to protect him. Makes sense no? The Cross. He received the mark of God to protect him.

I don't see the connection... To liken the mark of Qayin to the execution stake of Yeshua is anachronistic and I don't see it providing much if anything for interpretation. Those who saw the mark on Qayin would not liken it to atonement that would arise millenniums later. Once we start relating symbols such as this, disregarding context, one can easily see why the Constantine's vision of a cross in the sun is interpreted as something purely related to the execution stake of Yeshua rather than a sign of Mithra, to whom his legacy ascribes a devout Mithraist until his death. I'm not saying this reading cannot take place regarding Qayin. I'm just saying that it requires great care when approaching parallels as this one.
Reply
#9
Hello all,

I have recently been debating with a JW and came across this information to combat the idea of a stake vs. a cross. Skip to 3:10 into the video.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_EFDjQlshU&feature=related">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_EFDjQl ... re=related</a><!-- m -->

Also, check out the following video with regard how JW switched their beliefs on this subject. Skip to 1:00 into the video. Yes, the video might be a bit silly, but it makes a few good points.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfDIrPdBQgw&feature=fvw">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfDIrPdBQgw&feature=fvw</a><!-- m -->

God Bless,

-Nimrod Warda-
Reply
#10
Rafa Wrote:
Quote:look at the letter TAW. it is clearly a cross, and this is the form of Hebrew used BEFORE the Exodus events, so it predates PaleoHebrew, which was influenced by the Aramaics script.

Something interesting : according to the Zohar, the letter TAW was the mark placed on Cain to protect him. Makes sense no? The Cross. He received the mark of God to protect him.

Shlama akhi,


while i agree the Qayin's sign was for protection definitely, i don't know that it was on his forehead. Scripture doesn't tell us that much. also, it wasn't necessarily a "mark" even, it was more of a sign. perhaps his nomadic lifestyle was the sign itself; formerly he was agriculturally-minded, but since the curse had to do with not getting produce from his efforts, perhaps it forced him to do the No[d]/wandering thing, and that was the sign to all who met him. if he was driven from such a lifestyle, what more worse lifestyle would somebody end up with if they were to be avenged seven-fold?

also, do you know where in the Zohar it specifies it being a TAW? i'm not well acquainted with the Zohar, but i thought it just mentioned it being a Hebrew letter. does it actually say it was the TAW?

Ezekiel saw his vision in chapter 9 of the book that describes the righteous having the TAW written upon their foreheads, though, so maybe that is what you are thinking of? just wondering....


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply
#11
Rafa Wrote:Hmmm....haven't found the exact passage yet akhi. It is possible that the commentary I was reading was making the assumption that since the meaning of Taw is "mark" that this was the mark given to Qayin. I read two very interesting things on the meaning of the Taw though (you probably know them) : The Taw is the last word letter in emet (truth), if you rub out the last letter you obtain the word "death". Likewise while emet is composed of the first, middle and last letters of the alphabet, Sheqer (falsehood) is composed of the last few letters. Truth is all encompassing, falsehood is a narrow path. Sound familiar? The Way of Life and the way of death (as the didache a good summary of Apostolic teachings describes it). I found that interesting.


Shlama akhi,

ah, yes, i've seen those interpretations, as well - very cool! if you are interested in such insights, you should check out THE WISDOM IN THE HEBREW ALPHABET, by Rabbi Michael Munk, and IN HIS OWN WORDS, by L. Grant Luton, which is similar, but from the point of view of a follower of Messiah. both are really great reads. then, of course, if you pay careful attention to the nuances of the Hebrew in Scripture, you will find further insights that offer clarification and depth not found in translations.


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply
#12
The shape of the crucifiction cross was seared in the minds of the witnesses. It was described to others, and to their followers and to their children. It became well know to the early Christians and passed down through the ages. The hidstorical trasdition is the evidence not the various interpretations of an Aramiac word.

Otto
Reply
#13
I was just passing through on this topic, and I remember seeing somewhere in Josephus where he describes the shape of a cross as being like a battering ram and indicates that it did indeed have a cross-beam.
Reply
#14
...
Reply
#15
Rafa Wrote:Hmmm....haven't found the exact passage yet akhi. It is possible that the commentary I was reading was making the assumption that since the meaning of Taw is "mark" that this was the mark given to Qayin. I read two very interesting things on the meaning of the Taw though (you probably know them) : The Taw is the last word letter in emet (truth), if you rub out the last letter you obtain the word "death". Likewise while emet is composed of the first, middle and last letters of the alphabet, Sheqer (falsehood) is composed of the last few letters. Truth is all encompassing, falsehood is a narrow path. Sound familiar? The Way of Life and the way of death (as the didache a good summary of Apostolic teachings describes it). I found that interesting.


Shlama akhi,

i was skimming over The Wisdom In The Hebrew Alphabet just yesterday, and ran across the following passage, concerning the letter Tav and Qayin:

Quote:The very first "sign" mentioned in Scripture (Genesis 4:15), was placed by God Himself, Who inscribed a single letter of the Aleph-Beis on Cain's forehead. Nachlas Benjamin to Tanchuma maintains that the sign was made in form of a [Tav] (Midrash Hagadol). The Midrash records various opinions as to the nature of God's sign on Cain, depending on whether or not Cain was a remorseful penitent (R' Hirsch).
~Rabbi Michel Munk, 219.


does any of that info ring a bell as a source-text from where you saw the Tav related to Qayin's mark?



Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)