Gospels don't say Jesus was crucified, scholar claims

[Ahimsa]

Update July 2 8:04 a.m. After this article posted Gunnar Samuelsson got in touch to stress that his research focuses specifically on the narratives of Jesus’s execution in the four Gospels, not on the entire New Testament, so “Gospels” has been substituted for “Bible” in the headline.

There have been plenty of attacks on Christianity over the years, but few claims have been more surprising than one advanced by an obscure Swedish scholar this spring.

The Gospels do not say Jesus was crucified, Gunnar Samuelsson says.

In fact, he argues, in the original Greek, the ancient texts reveal only that Jesus carried “some kind of torture or execution device” to a hill where “he was suspended” and died, says Samuelsson, who is an evangelical pastor as well as a New Testament scholar.

“When we say crucifixion, we think about Mel Gibson’s ‘Passion.’ We think about a church, nails, the crown of thorns,” he says, referring to Gibson’s 2004 film, “The Passion of the Christ.”

“We are loaded with pictures of this well-defined punishment called crucifixion - and that is the problem,” he says.

Samuelsson bases his claim on studying 900 years’ worth of ancient texts in the original languages - Hebrew, Latin and Greek, which is the language of the New Testament.

He spent three years reading for 12 hours a day, he says, and he noticed that the critical word normally translated as “crucify” doesn’t necessarily mean that.

“He was handed over to be ‘stauroun,’” Samuelsson says of Jesus, lapsing into Biblical Greek to make his point.

At the time the apostles Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were writing their Gospels, that word simply meant “suspended,” the theologian argues.

“This word is used in a much wider sense than ‘crucifixion,’” he says. “It refers to hanging, to suspending vines in a vineyard,” or to any type of suspension.

“He was required to carry his ‘stauros’ to Calvary, and they ‘stauroun’ him. That is all. He carried some kind of torture or execution device to Calvary and he was suspended and he died,” Samuelsson says.
…
Samuelsson wants to be very clear about what he is saying and what he is not saying.

Most importantly, he says, he is not claiming Jesus was not crucified - only that the Gospels do not say he was.

“I am a pastor, a conservative evangelical pastor, a Christian,” he is at pains to point out. “I do believe that Jesus died the way we thought he died. He died on the cross.”

But, he insists, it is tradition that tells Christians that, not the first four books of the New Testament.

“I tried to read the text as it is, to read the word of God as it stands in our texts,” he says - what he calls “reading on the lines, not reading between the lines.”
…
More profoundly, his research “ought to make Christians a bit more humble,” he says.

“We fight against each other,” he reflects, but "the theological stances that keep churches apart are founded on things that we find between the lines.

“We have put a lot of things in the Bible that weren’t there in the beginning that keep us apart. We need to get down on our knees as Christians together and read the Bible.”

 

[SnakeMauler]

Thats the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

 

[Contarini]

Thats the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

What is?

Certainly the fuss being made over this is dumb, and insofar as Samuelsson seems to be making some of the fuss (in the interest of some sort of sola scriptura point), I think he’s behaving foolishly.

But I can’t see anything particularly dumb or particularly startling about what he’s saying. I’ve read enough ancient literature and enough about the ancient world to see his point–the ancients seem to have thought of hanging, impaling, and crucifixion as more or less the same thing. I don’t see that it particularly matters whether Jesus was hung by ropes, nailed, or impaled; or whether the “cross” was made of two pieces of wood so arranged as to form four right angles, or whether it was just one piece of wood, or something else.

The point of crucifixion seems to have been
a. to expose the body of the criminal in a humiliating manner as an example to others; and secondarily
b. to kill the criminal in a slow and agonizing manner.

What exactly do people think is at stake here?

On second thoughts, what does Samuelsson do with John 20:25?

Edwin

 

[Publisher]

Every crucifixtion that took place by no means occured as Christian religious symbols show it.

Crucifixtion was a method of execution…whether the criminal was nailed to an upright pole…or nailed to a wall…or nailed to some “torture/execution” devices or hung by some other manner…the result was death.

The nominal symbol of the “cross” as worn by nominal Christians and used in many Christian houses of worship or books is not some “holy” symbol that MUST coincide with Jesus’ execution device…he was executed using some form of “execution or torture device”…I don’t think it makes any difference whether the execution device was an upright pole…a cross beam set upon a pole to make a “T”…or an upright pole to make a “t”…or if he was actually hung upon a felled tree trunk…he died. As a Friend, we do not use iconic imagery in our meeting houses, so I really have no “dog in this fight” other than to mention there were various forms of “crucifixtion”…how Jesus was executed on this “execution/torture device” really isn’t a question I “stress” over.

 

[Nicea325]

What nonsense! More modern ideas and revisionist perceptions. I once also saw a documentary on crucifxion and another ‘modern’ scholar asserted that the Romans NEVER actually made crosses or the cross-bar for crucifixion? He said it is all a myth? SAY WHAT? He stated the Romans would only place them on trees? Yes,but they also would have them carry the cross bar. How do these so-called scholars come up with such absurdities?

 

[PrayForMe23]

I will admit that I am still learning about much of this. Though I had learned a bit of Christianity in the past, I will deny that I am somehow very knowledgeable about all this. I am most certainly not. But if I may state a small theory on this matter…

To the authors of the Gospels, could it not have seemed an insignificant task to dwell on the particular means of death? Their focus was to speak more of Jesus’s task and to spread the Gospel. Perhaps they used phrasing which did not so much as adorn the method as it adorned the mission of the Lord? Could it be that using a general terminology of the time kept them more focused on what His mission for us all could be rather than to take away the focus by worrying about more specific details?

I do hope that no one will think that I have tried to be rude or have stepped out of line. This is merely my thought on the matter and nothing more.

Peace and blessings of Our Lord for all.

Chris

 

[Ahimsa]

What exactly do people think is at stake here?

Brilliant. Just couldn’t help yourself, could you?

On second thoughts, what does Samuelsson do with John 20:25?

Edwin

I think Samuelsson would argue that one could be nailed to a single upright pole.

 

[JRKH]

Thank goodness for Sacred Tradition which has paased down to us the correct visual of how Christ was killed.

See what happens when Tradition is ignored??

Peace
James

 

[Nicea325]

Thank goodness for Sacred Tradition which has paased down to us the correct visual of how Christ was killed.

See what happens when Tradition is ignored??

Peace
James

Thousands upon thousands of different churches.

 

[Garyjohn2]

This is dumb. Ok, it’s not dumb to say “it doesn’t specifically say “crucify” in the Gospels.” This can be true…but what’s the point? The rest of the NT confirms it, and people have recognized it as crucifixion since the beginning. Jesus was obviously crucified.

The dumb part is having an article written on it, being interviewed for it, and wasting all the time studying it. Nobody has really learned anything from this endevour. Sometimes, scholars amaze me, and not in the way they intend to. I’m a grad student, I see it all the time.

Wow.

 

[JRKH]

This is dumb. Ok, it’s not dumb to say “it doesn’t specifically say “crucify” in the Gospels.” This can be true…but what’s the point? The rest of the NT confirms it, and people have recognized it as crucifixion since the beginning.

The dumb part is having an article written on it, being interviewed for it, and wasting all the time studying it. Nobody has really learned anything from this endevour. Sometimes, scholars amaze me, and not in the way they intend to. I’m a grad student, I see it all the time.

Wow.

Peace
James

 

[choy]

this is the problem with the Bible-only faiths
because their reliance on the text only, they can’t see past the text only

given that there was no specific text claiming that Jesus was crucified in the way we believe, but rather the text says an ambigous torture that involves hanging which cricifixion is one of the many options, they now lose sight of the truth

i think if his research is proven to be true, it would emphasise further the importance of the Church and Apostolic Succession and prove how misguided Protestants are. Apostolic Succession doesn’t only passes down authority, but also the teaching. it emphasizes the importance of discipleship, and that a disciple must learn from an Apostle or Apostolic successor to learn all the truth which the Church has. this will show the glaring lack of knowledge of the truth by relying on the Bible alone

 

[Publisher]

Thank goodness for Sacred Tradition which has paased down to us the correct visual of how Christ was killed.

See what happens when Tradition is ignored??

Peace
James

I see what happens when our “sacred iconic” representations of an event 2000 years removed is questioned.

 

[wmscott]

The New Testament cites the cross 28 times. I will trust this text over any new age, un-authoritative source that abounds. Go ahead and rationalize any way you want, I will go by the Word of God over man.

Matthew 10:38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me.
Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Matthew 27:32 And going out, they found a man of Cyrene, named Simon: him they forced to take up his cross.
Matthew 27:40 And saying: Vah, thou that destroyest the temple of God, and in three days dost rebuild it: save thy own self: if thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.
Matthew 27:42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the king of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.
Mark 8:34 And calling the multitude together with his disciples, he said to them: If any man will follow me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mark 15:21 And they forced one Simon a Cyrenian who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and of Rufus, to take up his cross.
Mark 15:30 Save thyself, coming down from the cross.
Mark 15:32 Let Christ the king of Israel come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
Luke 9:23 And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
Luke 14:27 And whosoever doth not carry his cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Luke 23:26 And as they led him away, they laid hold of one Simon of Cyrene, coming from the country; and they laid the cross on him to carry after Jesus.
John 19:17 And bearing his own cross, he went forth to that place which is called Calvary, but in Hebrew Golgotha.
John 19:19 And Pilate wrote a title also, and he put it upon the cross. And the writing was: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
John 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.
John 19:31 Then the Jews, (because it was the parasceve,) that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the sabbath day, (for that was a great sabbath day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of speech, lest the cross of Christ should be made void.
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the word of the cross, to them indeed that perish, is foolishness; but to them that are saved, that is, to us, it is the power of God.
Galatians 2:19 For I, through the law, am dead to the law, that I may live to God: with Christ I am nailed to the cross.
**Galatians 5:11 **And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the scandal of the cross made void.
Galatians 6:12 For as many as desire to please in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised, only that they may not suffer the persecution of the cross of Christ.
Galatians 6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ; by whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world.
Ephesians 2:16 And might reconcile both to God in one body by the cross, killing the enmities in himself.
**Philippians 2:8 **He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross.
Philippians 3:18 For many walk, of whom I have told you often (and now tell you weeping), that they are enemies of the cross of Christ;
Colossians 1:20 And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven.
Colossians 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of the decree that was against us, which was contrary to us. And he hath taken the same out of the way, fastening it to the cross:
Hebrews 12:2 Looking on Jesus, the author and finisher of faith, who having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame, and now sitteth on the right hand of the throne of God.

 

[Garyjohn2]

I wish I could read ancient greek.

Does this mean when the crowds were shouting at Pilate, they were saying “Hang him from a nondescript torture device! Hang him from a nondescript torture device!”

 

[choy]

The New Testament cites the cross 28 times. I will trust this text over any new age, un-authoritative source that abounds. Go ahead and rationalize any way you want, I will go by the Word of God over man.

Matthew 10:38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me.
Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Matthew 27:32 And going out, they found a man of Cyrene, named Simon: him they forced to take up his cross.
Matthew 27:40 And saying: Vah, thou that destroyest the temple of God, and in three days dost rebuild it: save thy own self: if thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.
Matthew 27:42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the king of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.
Mark 8:34 And calling the multitude together with his disciples, he said to them: If any man will follow me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mark 15:21 And they forced one Simon a Cyrenian who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and of Rufus, to take up his cross.
Mark 15:30 Save thyself, coming down from the cross.
Mark 15:32 Let Christ the king of Israel come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
Luke 9:23 And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
Luke 14:27 And whosoever doth not carry his cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Luke 23:26 And as they led him away, they laid hold of one Simon of Cyrene, coming from the country; and they laid the cross on him to carry after Jesus.
John 19:17 And bearing his own cross, he went forth to that place which is called Calvary, but in Hebrew Golgotha.
John 19:19 And Pilate wrote a title also, and he put it upon the cross. And the writing was: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
John 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.
John 19:31 Then the Jews, (because it was the parasceve,) that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the sabbath day, (for that was a great sabbath day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of speech, lest the cross of Christ should be made void.
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the word of the cross, to them indeed that perish, is foolishness; but to them that are saved, that is, to us, it is the power of God.
Galatians 2:19 For I, through the law, am dead to the law, that I may live to God: with Christ I am nailed to the cross.
**Galatians 5:11 **And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the scandal of the cross made void.
Galatians 6:12 For as many as desire to please in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised, only that they may not suffer the persecution of the cross of Christ.
Galatians 6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ; by whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world.
Ephesians 2:16 And might reconcile both to God in one body by the cross, killing the enmities in himself.
**Philippians 2:8 **He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross.
Philippians 3:18 For many walk, of whom I have told you often (and now tell you weeping), that they are enemies of the cross of Christ;
Colossians 1:20 And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven.
Colossians 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of the decree that was against us, which was contrary to us. And he hath taken the same out of the way, fastening it to the cross:
Hebrews 12:2 Looking on Jesus, the author and finisher of faith, who having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame, and now sitteth on the right hand of the throne of God.

i think what the “scholar” is trying to say is that all those you quoted are just english translations, and didn’t appear in the original Greek or Latin or Hebrew. and he confined his statement to the 4 Gospels

 

[Ahimsa]

The New Testament cites the cross 28 times. I will trust this text over any new age, un-authoritative source that abounds. Go ahead and rationalize any way you want, I will go by the Word of God over man.

Matthew 10:38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me.

The author is only talking about the Gospels, not the whole NT.

In Matthew 10:38, for instance, the word “cross” in Greek is “stauron”, which means “an upright stake”, as well as a “cross”. The author argues that, thus, the Gospels do not explicitly talk about a T-shaped cross.

 

[SonCatcher]

I see what happens when our “sacred iconic” representations of an event 2000 years removed is questioned.

The icons come from Tradition. Not vice versa.

 

[SonCatcher]

i think what the “scholar” is trying to say is that all those you quoted are just english translations, and didn’t appear in the original Greek or Latin or Hebrew. and he confined his statement to the 4 Gospels

It is rather foolish of him to start with the Gospels as the Epistles were written before them.

Is there a specific Greek term from the first century for “cross” as we define it?

 

[Ahimsa]

It is rather foolish of him to start with the Gospels as the Epistles were written before them.

Is there a specific Greek term from the first century for “cross” as we define it?

Which epistles did you have in mind?

1 Corinthians 1:18 uses the same Greek word the Gospels use for “cross”, “stauros”.