Nobody knows. The Romans used both crosses and stakes in those days. And Acts 5:30 even says "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a **tree**". So it could be a cross, stake, or a tree. Unfortunately, we don't know if Jesus was crucified on a stake or a cross. http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.showResource/CT/BQA/k/109

There is no single test, experiment or evidence that can settle this question, but... The symbol of the cross as a common symbol of Christianity dates back at least as early as the 4th century (when Romans were still crucifying people). The Latin "crux" (cross) does appear in some ancient Latin translations of the Bible. A great deal of history and tradition supports the cross. Those who dispute the cross must present a case stronger than 1700 years of recorded tradition and history. Having said that, I am aware of only one group that considers the question significant. Traditional Christian beliefs are unaffected whether the "cross" was shaped like a "T" a "t" a "+" an "x" or a "|". Some illustrations have been published showing Jesus on a vertical stake with both hands nailed together above his head. Any illustration showing fewer than two nails is in clear violation of the Bible which notes "the nails" (note plural) pierced his hands. This site has a lot of discussion about the arguments: http://www.freeminds.org/doctrine/cross.htm I do not know who sponsors the site or their overall bias, but this particular page seemed to have a lot of information on why the traditional church accepts a cross and answering the arguments against it. I do not find the case for a stake compelling. You will have to get someone who believes in it to best defend it.

the modern belief that Jesus was killed on a 't' (small t) shaped cross is not accurate, he was killed on a capital T shaped cross, known as a Tau. Interestingly, the 'small t' shape is actually an Egyptian heirogliphic meaning 'saviour', which, when translated into Hebrew, means Yahoshua, which in turn, translated into Greek, means Jesus. (refer to "The Hiram Key" by Robert Lomas.)

Jesus was crucified on a cross and there is plenty of evidence to support this. Firstly, I don't believe that some of the people, when writing accounts of events that happened, may not have realised that their writings would be kept and studied for thousands of years. (However the good Lord did) So fairly simple men wrote down what they saw through their own eyes, and in doing so, captured the how, the why and the who. The cross; The cross was a symbol of torture and hundreds where erected along the pathways into towns and cities. Travels could see living criminals hanging as they entered. As real deterrent to thieves and criminals that this is the form of punishment that awaits those who commit crime. The cross was a particularly cruel and slow way of killing someone. But there where ways to either speed up the process, or slow it down. To get the maximum effect from a cross, (keep the person alive the longest) the criminal would be tied with ropes to the cross, and simply left there. The family of the criminal could feed the poor soul if permitted, or they where left to starve to death. To inflict more pain, they would be nailed to the cross. I at first thought that the nails must have gone through the wrists, as the hands themselves would not support the weight. However I have learnt that if a nail is driven through the hand basically if you follow the line from the thumb to the palm, there is a "Y" point which alone can support over a hundred kilograms without tearing itself apart. It is highly unlikely that the person would die as a result of these injuries, but endure great pain. There was a peice of wood placed at the feet, which would help the criminal support, their weight. Without it, they would die within a few hours. The feet would continually be pushing up on the base, trying to take the weight off the hands and allow the person to breathe. Remove the wood and the criminal is hanging by his hands only. The strain on the rib cage would be unbearable. If guards wanted the criminal to die before the Sabbath, they would break the person’s legs. They would lose the ability to push their body up, dramatically reducing the ability to breath. There are many accounts through the New Testament of the nail marks through the hands and feet of Jesus. If this is the case, there has to be at least two pieces of wood. If you wish to know more about the cross, I suggest you read the New Testament of the Bible. The Stake; the stake from what I know was used throughout Romania It was a single peice of wood, planted into the ground. (A lot where most likely trees with the branches removed) The unlucky soul, who was placed on a stake, was either tied or impaled, mainly impaled. Whether branches/pieces of wood where driven through the shoulder blades, the anal canal, the person would just hang there. There was no attempt to relieve the suffering of the person, and I would guess that either as a result of their injuries, lose of blood or decapitation, the person would die a slow and painful death. The character "Dracula" was born through Vlad Dracula, nicknamed Vlad Tepes (Vlad the Impaler) — who was a ruler of Wallachia (1456-1462). More can be read at http://www.romaniatourism.com/dracula.html

Jesus very well may not have even been crucified through my studys and reading the novel The Hiram Key i have found this... Jesus's name was Jesus BUT Jesus is simply a greek intepretation of the hebrew name "Yehoshua" -Christ means "A person that will become rightful king of Jews"(In herbrew/Aramaic) -Jesus said he was the "Son of god" which was the title for anyone claiming kingship -All kings from times before pharoahs had there right to rule through descent from the gods -The "Man" who was released from Jesus's trials name was Barabbas, this is not a name but a TITLE meaning, "Bar"-Son Of, And "Abba" literally means father, still referenced today as god, The Son Of God, was released from trial and never crucified, 2 JESUS'S, ONE CRUCIFIED, NEVER PROVEN WHICH ONE. I am only 15 and would really appreciate any insight on what i have just wrote even if you disagree with me please email me ,holyfollower@hotmail.com

Scripture appears to be clear and consistent that Jesus died on a cross. These are some of -but not all- the references... Matthew 27:32 - "As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross." Matthew 27:40 - "You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God!" Mark 15:21 - "A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross." Mark 15:32 - "'Let this Christ, this King of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.' Those crucified with him also heaped insults on him." John 19:25 - "Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene." Acts 2:23 - "This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross."

the word stauros in Koine Greek (the language of the New Testament) means both tree and cross. Some sects/cults pick on this dual meaning to try to make a big deal of HOW Jesus was executed. While we have no photos of the actual occurrence: a piece of graffiti from about 200AD gives us the best view of how Christians in the lifetime of the apostles viewed Jesus death. The graffiti was done to mock a christian by someone who did not believe what he believed. It shows a man with a donkey's head affixed to a CROSS, with the words :Alexamenos worships his god.

He died on a cross while eating a steak...The bible just forgot the state it.

If I were a JW I'd answer stake. If I considered myself a Christian I'd answer cross. If I were a literalist I'd answer cross. (nails for his hands)If I were a Greek translator/ historian I'd say that it is impossible to tell by the language translations. If I were a Biblical scholar, I'd go with whatever my particular affiliations told me it was. If I were a Roman historian, (and knew that the cross became a symbol of Christianity in Constantine's time long after the death of Christ)I might ask how Romans traditionally carried out crucifixions. As for me, I'll go with the findings of Roman History and Archaeology.

Hmmm.... TO ME.... Jesus was crucified on the cross being that I don't know of archeology that proves ALOT of people were crucified on posts or stakes... All I know is that Jesus died on the cross... Wether that cross was an X or a cross I guess I will have to wait & ask my Jewish buddy when he gets back here for his 'wedding'...

I ask "singwell" You claim 'stauros means both cross and tree? State your source! Unless you are using a church newsletter...you have 'NO source'! According to every Greek [Koine] Dictionary such as Vine's...'Stauros', although translated into Bibles as 'Cross'... Means 'POLE..or STAKE'! Claiming 'stauros' is a cross is a lie!!! and has now become clearly manifest!!! 'Stauros' is a single beam. The 'Cross' was used in worship by the Egyptians, and others, to worship Tammuz...thousands of years before Jesus became human, and was condemned by God! It was foretold in the Bible that this would happen. 2 Tim.4:3-5;2 Pet. 1:14 To Lincoln... Please...Where do you get your data??? Most Bible translations say Christ was “crucified” rather than “impaled.” This is because of the common belief that the torture instrument upon which he was hung was a “cross” made of two pieces of wood instead of a single pale, or stake. "Tradition"....[not the Scriptures] also says that the condemned man carried only the crossbeam of the cross, called the patibulum, or antenna, instead of both parts. In this way some try to 'avoid' the predicament of having too much weight for one man to drag or carry to Golgotha. Yet, what did the 'Bible writers' themselves say about these matters? They used the Greek noun stau·ros´ 27 times and the verbs stau·ro´o 46 times, syn·stau·ro´o (the prefix syn, meaning “with”) 5 times, and a·na·stau·ro´o (a·na´, meaning “again”) once. They also used the Greek word xy´lon, meaning “wood,” 5 times to refer to the torture instrument upon which Jesus was nailed. Again....Stau·ros´ in both the classical Greek and Koine carries no thought of a “cross” made of two timbers. It means only an upright stake, pale, pile, or pole, as might be used for a fence, stockade, or palisade. Says Douglas’ New Bible Dictionary of 1985 under “Cross,” page 253: “The Gk. word for ‘cross’ (stauros; verb stauroo . . . ) means primarily an upright stake or beam, and secondarily a stake used as an instrument for punishment and execution.” The fact that Luke, Peter, and Paul also used xy´lon as a synonym for stau·ros´ gives added evidence that Jesus was impaled on an upright stake without a crossbeam, for that is what xy´lon in this special sense means. (Ac 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Ga 3:13; 1Pe 2:24) Xy´lon also occurs in the Greek Septuagint at Ezra 6:11, where it speaks of a single beam or timber on which a lawbreaker was to be impaled. The book 'The Non-Christian Cross', by John Denham Parsons, states: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . it is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our Bibles as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles..." Since his begining, Satan used the 'Cross' for false worship...and those who look...can decern his crafty, intelligence, as he has [with all our evidence] clearly re-introduced this demonic teaching into "Christianity"!!! Using a 'symbol' for worship is clearly Idolatry! And not to lessen his murder...what is important, is not so much how he died, but that he sacrificed his earthly life.....he died for us. 1 John 5:21

There are two words used in the Bible - stauros and xylos. Xylos simply means tree/wood. It's the root for xylophone (literally: wood music instrument). Stauros means post or pole. Nothing about either word even hints at crossed poles. The 'CROSS' is most definitely NOT scriptural.....no matter what anyone says. So where does the cross symbol come from? The first signs of it in 'Christianity' are 400 years after Jesus. It came from what is now the Catholic church when that made suspect Latin translations of the scriptures which replaced stauros & xylos with the Latin word 'cruz', or cross. This is also the point where the Church let other false doctrines prosper. The Trinity and Hellfire (the thought that our loving God would torture people for eternity....were both added by the Catholic Church, but never show up in the Bible. The cross or 't' also appears to have Babylon-ish origins. The cross was originally used to worship the false god Tammuz. The origination of false doctrine in the false religions of Babylon is unsurprising to say the least. Most if not all false doctrines have their start there. The book of Revelations even goes so far as to refer to false religion in the end times as the 'Harlot/Whore of Babylon'.

The earliest Latin translations are "crux," which does not mean a stake. The motive for dethroning the cross seems to be to prove that a weird, enslaving, and utterly dreary 19th-century cult is the church and that all other churches are a weird fourth-century cult.

It is highly possible that both are incorrect. http://www.carlsbadnm.com/sleeman/Story/rcrucify.htm What this is describing is a structure more like |-| instead of | or T. Why people would argue of the fine points of crucifixion is beyond me, any way that it happened has no bearing on the Gift of Christ's life for us.

You are correct, Athrael, when saying it has no bearing on the significance of Jesus death. However, most Bibles incorrectly represent the implement of Jesus murder as a 'cross', and most Churches support the error. The use of an object in worship to God is idolatry! The point being, Satan introduced the Cross as an idol for worship [thousands of years before Jesus], into the surrounding nations whose worship God condemned! Satan hates God and humans, so he injected this idol for people to use in worship to slap God in the face. Is it just coincidence that it has sprung up again? Did God change his mind, and now approve of Satan's creation...or is Satan a master deceiver? Any reputable Greek Bible dictionary, such as 'Vines Expository', defines 'stauros' as a single beam, or pole. Therefore, if a religious organization approves of the Cross...something conceived by Satan...and understanding how God viewed its use in the past, can they be approved by God today? If not...who does have their approval? [Ex.20:4; 1 John 5:21] (This will not let me click on comment??)

It's not. Not one bit.

What Christ died on is not the issue. The fact that He died for you and me and everyone who wishes to accept his gift of salvation. Every time I hear people debating this issue I cringe because God wants us to pay attention to his teachings in the bible and accept it (salvation) as a gift and not get caught up in the religiosity of faith rather than the faith itself. We do as much as we can to please God with our actions/works but they are not what saves us either, they ony compliment our faith and act as proof of our acceptence of the gift He offers.

The Bible says He was crucified on a cross, not a stake. So I say and believe that He died on a cross. I hope that this is helpful. -In the service of the Master. Thank you and God bless you!

True, the Romans did use an instrument of execution known in Latin as the crux. And in translating the Bible into Latin, this word crux was used as a rendering of stau•ros´. Because the Latin word crux and the English word cross are similar, many mistakenly assume that a crux was necessarily a stake with a crossbeam. However, The Imperial Bible-Dictionary says: “Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole, and this always remained the more prominent part.”

I like a lot of the answers but to me this looks this is a trick question. The question says was Jesus crucified on a cross, so the answer is yes because CRUCificxion was done on crosses. If it was a stake wouldn't it be stakified or something like that?

Jesus was hanged on a execution stake or a tree. read Acts 5:30; 10:39. Galations 3:13 Christians must bear stake as reproach. Matthew 10:38; Luke 9:23. The Cross should not be worshiped. Displaying Jesus' stake a reproach. read Hebrews 6:6; Matthew 27:41,42. Use of Cross in worship is idolatry. Exodus 20:4,5; Jeremiah 10:3-5 Jesus is a spirit not still on a stake. 1 Timothy 3:16; 1 Peter 3:18. The bible itself provides the answer. Just read the scritures in your copy of the bible. Do not take man's word for it. God provided us with the answer.

Did Jesus die on a stake or a cross? One of the doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses that is wrong, though not an attack on an essential doctrine of scripture, is their teaching that Jesus died on a stake instead of a cross (Reasoning from the Scriptures, 1985, pp. 89-90). It really doesn't matter which Jesus died on. The issue is whether or not He shed His blood for our sins. In support of their position, they accurately state that the Greek word used in many Bibles which is translated into "cross" is the Greek word "stauros" which means, "an upright stake, esp. a pointed one, a cross."1 If a stake were used, instead of a cross, then Jesus' hands would have been placed above His head with a nail driven through His wrists. Since the wrists would most likely overlap, only one nail is needed through both wrists. However, some Jehovah's Witnesses have maintained that Jesus' hands may have been placed one higher than another on the stake. The reason they say this is because of John 20:25, "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." Notice the use of the word nails (plural) in reference to hands (plural). This is strong evidence that Jesus was crucified on a cross with outstretched hands -- one nail in each hand which would explain the plural nails. If Jesus was crucified on a stake then both hands would have been placed above his head and only one nail would have been needed to go through both hands. Again, it says "...in his hands the print of the nails..." Again, this is not an issue of essential doctrine, but I do believe the evidence is sufficient to demonstrate that the Watchtower organization is incorrect in yet another matter. _______________________

It is ABSOLUTELY not important. the crucifixion is what matters.

http://www.albatrus.org/english/religions/pagan/was_jesus_crucified_on_cross.htm

There is absolutely no evidence that Jesus was crucified at all. The Romans were meticulous about keeping records for such things and he never appears. Though, given that there is in fact no archaelogical evidence whatsoever that he actually existed, this isn't too surprising.

It would have been a cross with an already placed upright. After nailing him onto the crosspice, two, but most likely for soldiers would have lifted him up on the cross piece and dropped him into place. After that. it was customary to nail the feet in place. That was done with a single nail either through the ankles or through the feet or sometimes through the heels. Jesus had the slow crucifixion so he would get a seat, a very narrow easy to fall off seat. But the Romans liked to entertain themselves watching the effort to stay alive. Fall off the seat, push back up with the legs and arms to manage another breath. This begins with repetitions five to ten minutes apart. As he would tire, with every breath or about every 15 seconds. That seat? maybe 2 inches wide, It would take considerable effort to not fall off. About those nails. Standard military nails. To fullu appreciate them. consider a reailroad spike. Make it about half that size. And the points driven two purposes. To hold te person on the cross, but even more to inflict maximum pain as it hits really major nerves, but not blood vessels. Sometimes a bit of rope was added to keep from ripping out. Tests have shown that about 135 pounds would be maximum support by the nails with armes outstretched. Overhead though, 200 pounds would not be a problem. But if Jesus was the average size for a Jew at the time, He would have been between 5'1 and 5'3 and likely 115 pounds. I think reasonably his size as he was not described particularly tall or muscular. Romans were giants. Roman soldiers had to be 5'9 or better. Well it's all about what you eat. Romans got a lot of protein. Jesus, John the Baptist ate locusts for protein. Hey, the Romans took away the goats, sheep, chickens and the rest to eat for themselves. Ditto the wine.

I believe it was a cross. But the one who can tell you the answer for sure is JESUS Himself. To me His death & rising up again in three days for our sins, is what truly matters.

Most biblical scholars agree that a cross was used, not a stake. Crucifixion, not impalement.

Well, i think a tree was really used. Its alot more uncomfortable. And the cross didnt come out until after Yahshua.

Standard Roman crucifixtion cross. The upright pice would be there waiting for him. He carried only the horizontal piece. Jesus was given the slow crucifixion. That meant he got about a 3 inch wide seat so he could push up better and breathe a bit longer before slipping off the seat. I know JW's insist it was a stake. You're confused though. Roman's didn't do it that way. Persians did. And if it were done that way the method would be inserting the greased stake up the anus or possible impalement through the back and abdomen. One thing very wrong about the Bible account. Roman's left the body to rot and be consumed by animals. That served to prevent crime. And Romans would not vary this for Jesus by any means. So really doubt the account.

Something related. They did a forensic autopsy on Jesus. Jews there at that time would be typically about 5'3 and his weight about 115 pounds. Well John the Baptist ate locusts for a reason. The region lacked protein so they ate bugs to get what was available. Consequently Jews were very small people at that time. He might have been bigger. But no mention is made of Jesus as tall, muscular or anything. And this was the average size Jewish man then.

Geez, of course it was a cross. Where else would his arms go!

The truest answer to your question will not come from the Bible or ant religious text. It will come from historical documents. Did you know some Roman documents from Pilate exist? Minor details but does mention the trial and execution by slow crucifixion. However noticeably missing the account of Joseph claiming the body is not. However it is mentioned guards remained at the cross for 5 days to assure the body was not stolen. Sure looks like the Roman account has Jesus in place and not buried.

They nailed him to a cross with stakes through his hands and feet.

All this crab talk, Remember Remember Remember 10 Commandments says Thou Shalt Not Make Unto Thee Any Graven Image, Or Any Likeness Of Any Thing That Is In Heaven Above, Or That Is In The Earth Beneath, Or That Is In The Water Under The Earth: Thou Shalt Not Bow Down Thyself To Them, Nor Serve Them: For I The Lord Thy God Am A Jealous God Visiting The Iniquity Of The Fathers Upon The Children Unto The Third And Fourth Generation Of Them That Hate Me; And Shewing Mercy Unto Thousands Of Them That Love Me, And Keep My Commandments. So The Bible does not specify the exact shape of the “stauros” or “xulon” on which Christ was crucified. If God thought it was important for us to know, He clearly would have recorded it, leaving us no doubts. The shape is not important, but Christ’s sacrifice is! If you want to know more ytou can email me at REW1056@aol.com Richard

I believe that it was a stake, webbee. I base this on Scripture, for there is a parallel back in the days of the Israelites where they were told to look to the brazen serpent on the pole and be healed. Christ was said to be marred beyond human recognition, resembling a bloody serpent. What is more, it is by His stripes, and with His blood we are healed. Also, consider this, my friend. A cross would mean 3 nails, one for each hand and one for the combined feet, whereas a stake would need but two. I doubt the Romans wanted to make that much of a show out of this faux King of the Jews, as they called Him. The stake method is cheaper and faster, for Jesus was prominent enough with the fact that the "cross" was longer and therefore, taller than most others.

2 Timothy 2:14 and the context shows that disputing over `words` is useless and does no good. I hope we can put our differences aside and major in love for one another. You are on my prayer list and I sincerely hope that we can sincerely put our entire faith in the blood of Christ, that we know that is the only thing that can save us. No human organization will even come close. Baptist , Pentecostal, Charismatic or Third waver we all know its all Jesus and nothing else.

If you take two stakes and you "cross" them... what do you get?

That is widely debated. Many have said crosses were not used back in Jesus' day so it was a stake. Others say a cross was written into the Bible as a pagan symbol later. I don't think there's bonafiable proof as to the method but it's a matter of which faith interpretation you want to believe. Jehovah's are adamant it was a stake but I don't agree with a religion that's only been around less than a hundred years. Anybody can do the same amount of research they have invested.

All, My commment is this. The value of his sacrifice is all that matters! The manner in which this was accoplished in of no concern. If he was beheaded, would we carry an executioners ax around our necks? If he was sawn in half, would we venrate the saw? All this speculation is a waste of time. Think aobut it as a parent, would your wear a GUN charm to remember your child who was shot to death. No. You would ask people to remember that person for the good they did. That is all that God is asking us. I think all of our time is better served in researching the principles that Jesus provided us during his life.

Not important. His death and resurrection takes precedence over useless controversies created by perverted men. My 2 cents.

on a cross

A cross. Hard to have a crossbar on other shapes. The point of this debate is 2-fold. 1) academic curiosity and exchange of theories 2) whether it matters. Yes, it matters, since those of us who take the Bible as the inerrant Word of God are concerned that it BE preserved as accurate. It's not open to 'private interpretation' as it says of itself. Check quotes and topics easily on www.blueletterbible.com Online bible versions, concordance, helps. Some of the confusion stems from the many (over 200) modern bibles which are no longer accurate Bibles. There are words changed, omitted, and rephrased so as to change the real meaning. YES - this is a hornet's nest, I know. Let me submit this fact, and avoid impassioned arguments about "better readings"... In order to copyright a book, an earn royalties, it must be defined as a "separate and unique work". So if I wrote "Salem's Lot" over, in such a way as to legally copyright it, COULD it be the same book? COULD it even be the same story? Why believe the Bible is any different? We have maybe 300 bogus bibles out there, each with a copyright. It pays to be suspicious about this. Yes, I support the KJV. Yes, I support Hebrew direct translation which helps us understand the cultural idioms. No, I am not keeping any 'bible' that casts doubt on principles of the faith. "New Age Bible Versions" is a start. Good studying.

Uh-oh, you've been talking to a Jehovah's witness! Anyway, as another poster said, it is plausible that IF Jesus was real and he was crucified, it may have been a cross, it may have been a stake...hell it could've been a tree.

Why even bother answering that? Do we ask why scientist cant create DNA or do we just leave it alone? Why do people try to point out all the small points that are so small dont even make a difference? (not saying you are) Scientist also have so many large and small holes yet to be filled that they cant explain but are explained in the bible.

A little morbid, perhaps?! ;-)

A "cross", but apparently it was shaped like a capital T. It was a popular means of execution established by the Romans long before Jesus came around.

Strongs # 4716. stauros (stow-ros') ------------------------------------ ------------------------------- cross From the base of histemi; a stake or post (as set upright), i.e. (specially), a pole or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively, exposure to death, i.e. Self-denial; by implication, the atonement of Christ -- cross. ------------------------------------------------ Although either could be right without in any way affecting the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified, a little study of history reveals the facts. To save the time and repetitive work that would result if done individually each time, the Romans (see Ancient Empires - Rome) often had the very heavy and cumbersome upright post/stake already in place, and it was the cross-section that is described as being carried to the site with Jesus. Once there, our Savior was nailed to the horizontal beam which was then lifted up and fastened to the upright stake, thereby forming the cross - the symbol of our Savior's Sacrifice ("T" shape) http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/crosstak.htm ------------------------------------------ Now that we now that the Roman prefered the "T" shape for cruxifiction. You still have the Sign that to be added forming the top section of the cross. Giving you the traditional " t " shape.

On a cross. It was shaped like a "t".

The roman "crucifiction" was done on a T shape, however, in Jesus's case, they needed to put up that blasted sign with "IESVS·NAZARENVS·REX·IVDÆORVM (Jesus Nazarenus, Rex Judaeorum - Jesus of Nazaret, King of the Jews)", wich forced them to allow the beam to be tied lower, wich resulted in the cross shape. That's all.

Did Jesus Really Die on a Cross? Related topics: You Can Understand the Bible Is There a Sound Basis for Your Beliefs? THE cross is one of the most recognizable religious symbols known to man. Millions revere it, considering it to be the sacred instrument on which Jesus was put to death. Roman Catholic writer and archaeologist Adolphe-Napoleon Didron stated: “The cross has received a worship similar, if not equal, to that of Christ; this sacred wood is adored almost equally with God Himself.” Some say that the cross makes them feel closer to God when they pray. Others use it as an amulet, thinking that it protects them from evil. But should Christians use the cross as an object of veneration? Did Jesus really die on a cross? What does the Bible teach on this subject? What Does the Cross Symbolize? Long before the Christian era, crosses were used by the ancient Babylonians as symbols in their worship of the fertility god Tammuz. The use of the cross spread into Egypt, India, Syria, and China. Then, centuries later, the Israelites adulterated their worship of Jehovah with acts of veneration to the false god Tammuz. The Bible refers to this form of worship as a ‘detestable thing.’—Ezekiel 8:13, 14. The Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John use the Greek word stau·ros′ when referring to the instrument of execution on which Jesus died. (Matthew 27:40; Mark 15:30; Luke 23:26) The word stau·ros′ refers to an upright pole, stake, or post. The book The Non-Christian Cross, by J. D. Parsons, explains: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross.” Some ancient drawings depict the use of a single wooden pole in Roman executions As recorded at Acts 5:30, the apostle Peter used the word xy′lon, meaning “tree,” as a synonym for stau·ros′, denoting, not a two-beamed cross, but an ordinary piece of upright timber or tree. It was not until about 300 years after Jesus’ death that some professed Christians promoted the idea that Jesus was put to death on a two-beamed cross. However, this view was based on tradition and a misuse of the Greek word stau·ros′. It is noteworthy that some ancient drawings depicting Roman executions feature a single wooden pole or tree. “Guard Yourselves From Idols” A more important issue for true Christians should be the propriety of venerating the instrument used to kill Jesus. Whether it was an upright single torture stake, a cross, an arrow, a lance, or a knife, should such an instrument be used in worship? Suppose a loved one of yours was brutally murdered and the weapon was submitted to the court as evidence. Would you try to gain possession of the murder weapon, take photographs of it, and print many copies for distribution? Would you produce replicas of the weapon in various sizes? Would you then fashion some of them into jewelry? Or would you have these reproductions commercially manufactured and sold to friends and relatives to be venerated? Likely you would be repulsed at the idea! Yet, these very things have been done with the cross! Besides, the use of the cross in worship is no different from the use of images in worship, a practice condemned in the Bible. (Exodus 20:2-5; Deuteronomy 4:25, 26) The apostle John accurately reflected the teachings of true Christianity when he admonished his fellow Christians with the words: “Guard yourselves from idols.” (1 John 5:21) This they did even when it meant facing death in the Roman arena. First-century Christians, however, held the sacrificial death of Christ in high esteem. Likewise today, although the instrument used to torture and kill Jesus is not to be worshipped, true Christians commemorate Jesus’ death as the means by which God provides salvation to imperfect humans. (Matthew 20:28) This superlative expression of God’s love will bring untold blessings to lovers of truth, including the prospect of everlasting life.—John 17:3; Revelation 21:3, 4. Appeared in Awake! April 2006 Home | Beliefs | Future | Medical | Topics | Contact Us | Publications | Languages | Search | Index Copyright © 2007 Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. All rights reserved.

Cross

Jesus was killed on a STAURUS...An upright stake or pole... With both his arms above his head,,,,'Crucifixion implies a cross...and is NOT accurate.

A cross, because that is the meaning of the word "crucified". Didn't you learn Latin in school?

I think it's basically All the same thing the stake a tree a cross it was all made from a tree I think it's a matter of translation into one word or another.

cross