Cross

  • Thread starter Thread starter Churchman25
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Churchman25

Guest
So when it comes to mass and the statue of Jesus on the Cross on the wall in the Church how come churches have not changed to a more historically accurate version of the cross?
For example the kind he was crucified on was a lone beam that was already in the ground and then he would have just carried the cross section.
In churches today it depicts a form of cross that actually was not in use because, the other kind was more efficient. Also the weight of those kinds of crosses no human by themselves could physically lift. The weight would be to much.
 
The cross statue in the church isnt suppost to be historically accurate. The cross statue shows and reminds people that the Lord suffered and died for our sins.
 
Some people claim he wasn’t executed on a Cross-like object at all, some claim it was just a pole, so that his hands would have been fastened over his head, not outstretched.

The question is, does it really matter?
 
From a historical perspective the cross he is depicted on was not being used in that time period.
 
Churchman25 said:
From a historical perspective the cross he is depicted on was not being used in that time period.
Click to expand...
So what?
Some histories believe it was more like a Tau cross…not a pole.
It matters not. SALVATION is the point.
 
Jesus is also portrayed as a white guy in most western churches. 🤷
 
Churchman25 said:
From a historical perspective the cross he is depicted on was not being used in that time period.
Click to expand...
More curious than anything else - what type of cross? Do you have a reference (the only ones I could find are from Christian sites - I presume you are talking about some primary historical source, e.g. Roman or Greek?)
 
The cross I was trying to refer to is the tau cross.
Which was being used by the romans at the time of Christ.
 
Churchman25 said:
So when it comes to mass and the statue of Jesus on the Cross on the wall in the Church how come churches have not changed to a more historically accurate version of the cross?
For example the kind he was crucified on was a lone beam that was already in the ground and then he would have just carried the cross section.
In churches today it depicts a form of cross that actually was not in use because, the other kind was more efficient. Also the weight of those kinds of crosses no human by themselves could physically lift. The weight would be to much.
Click to expand...
What you suggest is PERSONAL piety.

What lifts you towards God may be different with others.

Personally, the depiction of Christ of the Cross seldom reflects any significant degree of suffering; BUT that too is personal piety.:o

Easter Blessings

Patrick
 
Stephen_says said:
Some people claim he wasn’t executed on a Cross-like object at all, some claim it was just a pole, so that his hands would have been fastened over his head, not outstretched.

The question is, does it really matter?
Click to expand...
Crucifixion at that time and place WAS a spectator sport. The Shroud of turn gives evidence of it. And that has been SACRED Tradtion for 2,000 years and counting:o

Easter Blessings,

PJM
 
TimothyH said:
Jesus is also portrayed as a white guy in most western churches. 🤷
Click to expand...
That’s because the majority of Christianity was white during the Middle Ages, the flowering of Christian art. Christianity had spread to Africa and out east and beyond in the first few centuries. Until this little thing called Islam.

It’s a relatable thing I suppose. Just like the Virgin Mary has appeared to various people in a different skin color (Bernadette: European; Our Lady of Guadalupe: Mexican). Skin color (just like the structure of the Cross) doesn’t matter really. The message does.

But if you’re going to be historically accurate, Jesus was probably not white. I agree. Any future Biblical movie makers, you have been warned. 🙂
 
Entwhistler said:
That’s because the majority of Christianity was white during the Middle Ages, the flowering of Christian art. Christianity had spread to Africa and out east and beyond in the first few centuries. Until this little thing called Islam.

It’s a relatable thing I suppose. Just like the Virgin Mary has appeared to various people in a different skin color (Bernadette: European; Our Lady of Guadalupe: Mexican). Skin color (just like the structure of the Cross) doesn’t matter really. The message does.

But if you’re going to be historically accurate, Jesus was probably not white. I agree. Any future Biblical movie makers, you have been warned. 🙂
Click to expand...
EXCELLENT!

Thanks

Easter Blessings,

Patrick
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top