Jesus Christ

Should we have and use crosses or pictures or statues, depicting Jesus Christ?

The answer to all of these questions is a resounding, “No.”

Regarding pictures, images or statues of Christ (including those which picture Him on the cross), we clearly read that we are not to have images of God (Exodus 20:4). Since Jesus is God (John 1:1; Hebrews 1:8; Titus 2:13), the creation and use of images or pictures of Christ violates this express prohibition.

Some say that this commandment does not prohibit us to portray Christ when He was a man, and not God. Even though Christ became fully man and fully flesh, He nevertheless did not cease to be the Personage that He had always been before–the Son of God, the second member in the God Family. That is why He, when here on earth, was called “Immanuel” or “God with us,” and that is why people, recognizing this fact, worshipped Him in the flesh.

In addition, Paul tells us that we are not to know Jesus Christ any longer according to the flesh (2 Corinthians 5:16), as He is now again a glorified, all-powerful and divine God being. He is depicted in Revelation 1:14, 16 with eyes as a flame of fire and as the sun shining in full strength. Pictures which show Christ today, even as a man, are totally inaccurate, even from a human standpoint. They portray Christ with long hair, although Paul said that it is a shame for a man to wear long hair (1 Corinthians 11:14). And even though Christ was a Jew, pictures today show Him with features which have no resemblance to Jewish men, but which give Him an effeminate appearance, instead.

When addressing the cross and its worship or use in religious services or at home, we should realize that the Bible does not even say that Christ was nailed to a cross, as it is pictured and portrayed today. In every case when the word “cross” is used in the Authorized Version or the New King James Bible, the Greek word is “stauros.”

According to Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, the meaning of that word is simply, “stake.” Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible agrees, defining “stauros” as a “stake or post, as set upright,” continuing that it could refer to a pole or a cross.

Bullinger’s Companion Bible states in Appendix 162 under “The Cross and Crucifixion”:

“In the Greek N.T. two words are used for ‘the cross’ on which the Lord was put to death. (1) The word ‘stauros’; which denotes an upright pale or stake, to which criminals were nailed for execution; (2) The word ‘xulon’, which generally denotes a piece of a dead log of wood, or timber, for fuel or for any other purpose… As this latter word ‘xulon’ is used for the former ‘stauros’, it shows us that the meaning of each is exactly the same. Our English word ‘cross’ is the translation of the Latin ‘crux’; but the Greek ‘stauros’ no more means a ‘crux’ than the word ‘stick’ means a ‘crutch’. “

The word “xulon” is translated many times in the Authorized Version or the New King James Bible as “tree,” for instance in 1 Peter 2:24, stating that Christ bore our sins in His body on the tree (compare, too, Acts 10:39; 13:29).

The Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words by Vine adds the following, when discussing the kind of death which Christ endured:

“… stauros denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake. On such malefactors were nailed for execution. Both the noun and the verb stauroo, to fasten to a stake or pale, are originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed cross.”

Since the Greek in the New Testament does not state that Christ died on a cross, as we know it today, how did this idea enter orthodox Christianity? Here is what happened:

Alexander Hislop writes in his book, The Two Babylons, pp. 197, 199:

“The same sign of the cross that Rome now worships was used in the Babylonian Mysteries, was applied by paganism to the same magic purposes, was honored with the same honors. That which is now called the Christian cross was originally no Christian emblem at all, but was the mystic Tau of the Chaldeans and Egyptians–the true original form of the letter T–the initial of the name of Tammuz… There is hardly a Pagan tribe where the cross has not been found. The cross was worshiped by the Pagan Celts long before the incarnation and death of Christ… It was worshiped in Mexico for ages before the Roman Catholic missionaries set foot there, large stone crosses being erected, probably to the ‘god of rain.’ The cross was widely worshiped, or regarded as a sacred emblem, was the unequivocal symbol of Bacchus, the Babylonian Messiah… “

We have found pictures, showing Assyrian, Egyptian, Hindu and Greek gods and goddesses associated with crosses. The ancient Greek goddess Diana is shown with a cross over her head–very similar to the portrayal of the “Virgin Mary” by many medieval artists.

Vine adds that the shape of a “two-beamed cross” had ” its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3rd century A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the cross of Christ.”

In addition, it is true that the Romans used a two-beamed cross as one of their methods of crucifixion, but it is highly unlikely that that method was used in the case of Christ. The Encyclopedia Britannica writes in its 11th edition, volume 7, on page 506:

“Two methods were followed in the infliction of the punishment of crucifixion. In both of these the criminal was first of all usually stripped naked, and bound to an upright stake, where he was so cruelly scourged with an implement, formed of strips of leather having pieces of iron, or some other hard material, at their ends, that not merely was the flesh often stripped from the bones, but even the entrails partly protruded, and the anatomy of the body was disclosed. In this pitiable state he was re-clothed, and, if able to do so, was made to drag the stake to the place of execution, where he was either fastened to it, or impaled upon it, and left to die.”

Regarding another method, the encyclopedia states that:

“After the scourging, the criminal was made to carry a cross beam to the place of execution, and he was then fastened to it by iron nails driven through the outstretched arms and through the ankles. Sometimes this was done as the cross lay on the ground, and it was then lifted into position.”

As pagans already worshiped the cross as we know it today, before they entered the Catholic fold; as the Roman Church allowed them to continue to worship the cross–only now in association with Christ; and as the Romans used a two-beamed cross as one of their methods of crucifixion, it can be easily seen how the Roman Church was able to convince an unsuspecting world that THAT was the method of Christ’s crucifixion.

However, as mentioned, it is highly unlikely that Christ was killed in that way. In the New Testament, the word for “stauros” is equated with a “tree”–and never with a two-beamed “cross.” Also, Christ had to carry His “cross” (“stauros”) to Golgotha (Matthew 27:32; John 19:17). Some commentaries say that this was only the cross beam–that is, only a small part of the “cross.” However, the Bible does not seem to support this. We read that Christ carried His “cross”; that subsequently, Simon a Cyrenian was compelled to bear “His cross” (Mark 15:21); and that after His crucifixion had begun, His mother and other relatives stood “by the cross of Jesus” (John 19:25). In all these passages, the same word “stauros” is used in the original Greek for “cross”—with no indication of just different parts of the “cross” being described at different times.

In addition, Christ told us to carry our “cross” (Matthew 10:38; 16:24) as He had carried and endured His “cross” (Hebrews 12:2). If He only carried a portion of the “cross,” then that analogy would break down, as we are to carry our entire “cross”–not just portions of it.

We also read that Christ compared the manner of His death with the way in which Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14). Numbers 21:9 tells us how Moses did it: “So Moses made a bronze serpent, and put it ON A POLE; and so it was, if a serpent had bitten anyone, when he looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.” The bronze serpent was placed on a solid pole, consisting of one piece–indicating the kind of pale or stake on which Christ died.

Since we don’t even know for sure the exact method of Christ’s crucifixion, but since we DO know that the “cross”–as orthodox Christianity uses it today “in memory of Christ”–was worshiped by pagans in connection with their pagan idols, we should not use it at all, nor even wear it as an amulet. The “Christian” use of the cross did not begin until the time of Constantine, and there is no evidence that God’s true Church has ever used cross symbols for any purpose.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

How, exactly, did Jesus Christ die? Why did a soldier pierce Him with a spear when He was already dead?

The answer to this question might be quite surprising to some who have never heard the truth before. The fact is, a Roman soldier KILLED Christ by piercing His side with a spear. Notice what happened.

The following is excerpted from our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–A Great Mystery,” pages 78 and 79:

“How Did Christ Die?

“… Christ died by shedding His blood (Mark 14:24), and it is through His precious shed blood that we can be saved (1 Peter 1:18–19).

“When we read Matthew’s account, in the New King James Bible, we will not find exactly how Christ died. The reason is that this translation omits a crucial verse, at the end of Matthew 27:49. Several translations, as well as many old manuscripts, have retained this missing verse. For instance, verses 49 and 50 read in the Moffat translation: ‘But the others said, “Stop, let us see if Elijah does come to save him!” (Seizing a lance, another pricked [better, pierced] his side, and out came water and blood.) Jesus again uttered a loud scream, and gave up his spirit.’

“The Fenton Bible translates the missing verse as follows: ‘But another taking a spear pierced His side, when blood and water came out.’

“A.T. Robertson, Harmony of the Gospels, states in a footnote to Matthew 27:49: ‘Many ancient authorities add: And another took a spear and pierced his side, and there came out water and blood.’

“The Revised Standard Version, and the New Revised Standard Version, add the following footnote: ‘Other ancient authorities insert, And another took a spear and pierced his side, and out came water and blood.’

“The Vaticanus–a Greek New Testament written in the 300’s A.D.–contains the missing verse as well. It reads: ‘And another took a spear and pierced his side and there came forth water and blood.’ The Sinaiticus Codex also contains the verse, and so does the Codex Ephraemi. According to The Testament in Greek, by Wescott and Hort, published in 1896, the missing verse also appears in most Syrian, Egyptian, Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic translations. It also appears in Origen’s work [around 200 A.D.]. Walton’s Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, published in 1657, claims, in Vol. VI, on page 6 of the appendix, that this missing verse was still a marginal reading of the Greek text when the King James Version was made.”

Do we know WHY the inspired passage in Matthew 27:49 was deleted from the sacred text? The deletion occurred when a spurious version of the book of Matthew, which was allegedly written by Barnabas, was found, which did not include the passage in Matthew 27:49. Note the following excerpts from Westcott and Hort:

“In a letter partially preserved in Syriac… [Severus] mentions the reading [of the missing passage] as having been vigorously debated at Constantinople in connexion with the matter of the patriarch Macedonius, when the… [spurious] copy of… Matthew’s Gospel said to have been discovered in Cyprus with the body of… Barnabas in the reign of Zeno (?477) was consulted and found not to contain the sentence in question … at Constantinople the holy Gospels were by command of the emperor censored,” and the passage in question was deleted from the sacred text of the gospel according to Matthew.

Of course, no emperor–nor ANY MAN, for that purpose–has any divine authority to add to or delete from the Word of God. And so, God saw to it that the missing passage WAS preserved–and anyone with an open mind can read it today in its original form.

To continue with our quote from our booklet, “Jesus Christ–A Great Mystery“:

“We need to take note of an additional passage in John’s account. We read in John 19:32–34: ‘Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.’

“This Scripture, the way it is rendered, seems to say that the soldier pierced Christ’s side after He had already died. However, the word ‘pierced’ is in the aorist tense in the original Greek, designating a kind of action, not the time of action. It describes an action done at a single moment, and not continuously, but it does not tell us when the action takes place. Only the context can make this clear. Therefore, in John 19:34, the passage could also be correctly translated as, ‘But one of the soldiers HAD PIERCED His side with a spear.’ From the missing verse in Matthew 27:49, we know that John 19:34 has to be translated, in fact, in the past tense.”

There is, in addition, another possibility as to how to read this particular passage in John 19:30-34. It has been suggested that the original inspired ORDER of verses 30 – 34 was subsequently changed, and that the original reading of these verses was as follows:

“(30a) So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, ‘It is finished!’ (34) But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. (30b) And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit. (31) Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. (32) Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. (33) But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs.”

To conclude from our afore-mentioned booklet:

“Christ shed His blood and died when a soldier pierced His side… We also read, in Luke 2:34–35: ‘Then Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, “Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against (yes, a sword will pierce through your own soul ALSO), that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.”‘ Finally, Isaiah 53:5 prophesied about Christ: ‘But He was wounded [margin, pierced through] for our transgressions.’ The New Testament record confirms that this is how Christ died.”

Christ died when a soldier pierced His side with a spear. This fact is also confirmed in other passages in the Old and the New Testament. Zechariah 12:10, in referring to the return of Jesus Christ, elaborates on the importance of the exact nature of Christ’s death, stating: “… then they will look on Me whom they have pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.”

Some might argue that the reference to Christ being pierced might apply just to His hands and feet. The fact that His hands and feet were pierced is most certainly included. Psalm 22:16, 18 gives the following prophecy regarding the suffering Christ: “They pierced My hands and My feet… They divide My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots.”

However, the piercing includes much more, and is primarily describing the very nature and moment of His death–not only the time several hours before, when His crucifixion began. Christ CRIED out when the soldier pierced His side with the spear.

And so, we read in Revelation 1:7: “Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.”

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Why does the Bible say that Christ's body was broken, when we read that not one of His bones was broken?

The apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 11:23-24: “For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He BROKE it and said, ‘Take, eat; this is [meaning “represents”] My body which is BROKEN for you; do this in remembrance of Me.'”

John 19:31-37 reports that at the time of Christ’s crucifixion, a soldier pierced His side with a spear and killed Him. When other soldiers came to break the legs of Christ and the two robbers, they noticed that Christ had already died. Therefore, they did not break His legs. Verse 36 informs us that “these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, ‘Not one of His bones shall be broken.'”

It is important that we realize the different words used in the Greek for the English word, “broken.” In John 19:36, the Greek word for “broken” [in the phrase, “Not one of His bones shall be broken”] is “suntribomai,” meaning “to be wholly broken.” Also, when we read that the soldiers came to break the legs of the crucified victims (in verses 32 and 33), the word is “katagnumi,” meaning “to break down.”

However, the word for Christ’s “broken” body, in 1 Corinthians 11:24, is “klaomai,” which is derived from the word “klao,” (just meaning, “to break”). “Klao” is also used in 1 Corinthians 11:24 (“He broke” the bread), and in 1 Corinthians 10:16 (“The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?”).

The use of different Greek words shows that there is no contradiction. Even though Christ’s bones were not wholly broken or broken down, His body was clearly “broken” for us, which is signified by the “broken” Passover bread.

John Gill’s Exposition to the Entire Bible points out:

“… for though a bone of him was not broken… his skin and flesh were torn and broken by blows with rods and fists, by whippings and scourgings, by thorns, nails, and spear…”

Some claim that the word “broken” in 1 Corinthians 11:24, referring to Christ’s broken body, is not contained in some old manuscripts, but even they admit that it needs to be supplied, in context with the broken bread. For instance, Jamieson, Fausset and Brown state: “The oldest manuscripts omit ‘broken,’ leaving it to be supplied from ‘brake.'” Others add the word “given” instead of “broken,” but this seems to be insufficient when analyzing the context: Christ did BREAK the bread and then gave it to the disciples, explaining that the BROKEN bread symbolized His body.

In any event, old Greek manuscripts DO include the word “broken” in 1 Corinthians 11:24, when referring to Christ’s body, and the Authorized Version, which is based on the so-called “textus receptus,” does include it in its translation. It is also included in the Greek Text of Stephens [or Stephanus], together with the Interlinear Literal Translation.

The broken Passover bread has tremendous symbolic meaning for us today. As we explain in our booklet, “The Meaning of God’s Spring Holy Days“:

“The bread which Christ ate, and which He wanted His disciples to partake of, was unleavened bread, symbolizing Christ’s sinless life. When Christ broke the unleavened bread and handed it to the disciples to eat, it foreshadowed the pain and suffering He would have to endure, being beaten and pierced with a [spear] at the cross. THE BROKEN BREAD includes healing from physical pain, sickness and injury (Isaiah 53:4–5; Psalm 103:1–3; Matthew 8:16–17).

“In addition, the broken bread symbolizes spiritual healing or reconciliation with God, as man’s sins separate him from the Father (1 Peter 2:21–25; Colossians 1:19–22). Man must also be spiritually reconciled or ‘healed’ with each other. If we devour each other (Galatians 5:14–15), we can’t expect to receive physical healing from God.

“We must pray fervently, in faith, for our physical healing, calling for the elders of the Church to be anointed, while at the same time asking for forgiveness of our transgressions and sins against God and against each other that might have caused or contributed to our physical sickness (James 5:14–16).”

When we pray for God’s healing for our sicknesses, we are to remember Christ’s broken body and the excruciating suffering and pain He endured on our behalf. It is through the Sacrifice of Christ’s broken body that we can obtain physical healing from our sicknesses and injuries. Isaiah 53:4-5 tells us, in the Jewish Tanakh translation:

“Yet it was our sickness that he was bearing, Our suffering that he endured. We accounted him plagued, Smitten and afflicted by God; But he was wounded because of our sins, Crushed because of our iniquities. He bore the chastisement that made us whole, And by his bruises we were healed.”

The margin of the New King James Bible clarifies that the meaning for “wounded” is “pierced through,” and the “bruises” or “stripes” describe “blows that cut in.” We were and are healed by Christ’s “stripes”–when He was scourged or flogged with a Roman scourge (possibly TWICE), and when He endured the pain inflicted upon Him through thorns, brutal blows on the head, nails and the piercing spear of the Roman soldier (John 19:1; Matthew 27:26, 29-30; John 20:25; compare too Isaiah 50:6). For more information on the terrible events of Christ’s suffering and crucifixion, please read our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–A Great Mystery.”

We must never forget, or be indifferent or negligent about the fact, that Christ allowed His body to be broken FOR US–for the healing of OUR sicknesses and infirmities.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

The Work

What is God doing now? Does He work, and is there really a work of God at the present time?  The Bible reveals that God is engaged in a great endeavor that He watches over, guides and blesses.  This most important activity also involves those who have become a part of the Church of God, and the clear meaning is that we have a job to do!

Download Audio 

Those Who Believe

To believe is to accept as true or real. That isn’t always so easy, and it has proven difficult for mankind to believe God. Christians are called upon to believe the gospel in order to attain salvation. Additionally, we need to test ourselves and examine what we believe in light of God’s Word.

Download Audio 

When Change Comes

The Bible records episodes of dramatic change for both individuals and for nations. We are taught in God’s Word what to do when change comes–about times of transition. We face changes in our lives and within the Church of God, and we need to understand how to handle them according to God’s will.

 

Download Audio 

Christian Suffering

All men suffer. This does not exclude Christians. Sometimes, when we see that a true Christian suffers, we might ask ourselves, Why does God let it happen? It is important, then, to realize why God allows Christians to suffer. The reason is quite simple: We need to suffer to become perfect. Or to say it differently: We are made perfect through suffering.
Play Video

Download Audio 

Why Israel?

The Bible describes the nation God has formed and continues to sustain. Other stories about other people are recorded, but the primary focus is on Abraham and his descendants. Israel’s part in God’s plan for salvation is critically important for Christians to understand.

Download Audio 

We Are Here!

We are here in the appointed feast days of God–holy convocations. We need to consider God’s instructions for this time, and we need to understand more deeply what God reveals about this very special part of His plan of salvation.

Download Audio 

Children of Promise

The life of Isaac has important parallels for Christians, because our life, our calling and our future fall along similar lines. Importantly, God’s promise to Abraham that Sarah would bear Isaac centers on the role of faith. The Bible reveals that Christians are, by faith, the true children of promise–just as Isaac is.

Download Audio 
©2024 Church of the Eternal God