IN THE SKY ON GOOD FRIDAY !!!
I was driving so my little girl took the photo.
God is on time, every time. †
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (89)
sorted by:
The argument wasn't whether or not Constantine gained anything. The argument was if the cross was an original Christian symbol or introduced later by people who had nothing to do with the time of Christ and subsequently his death.
That the use of the cross was introduced as an addition by Constantine, a Roman emperor who saw it in a dream. This is the argument.
Now the cross itself is a pagan symbol. So a Pagan man, Constantine, introduced a pagan symbol in the midst of battle and associates it with Christianity.
This is a fact that people need to realize. The original Greek describes a stake and not a cross.
You got the definition from Biblehub where they describe "an upright stake, hence a cross". That's not even close to what an upright stake means lol. The Original Greek is stake. Not a cross.
The problem here is that there is no evidence Jesus died on a cross. Not according to the original language.
Of course the cross was pagan! Who is arguing that? The pagan Romans crucified Christ with their most-cruel method they had, and they had plenty of cruel methods. incidentally, if a Roman citizen was sentenced to death, he could not be crucified. You do realize Constantine converted to Christianity, right? Yes, and Thayer’s definition includes “cross”. You’re stuck on being contrary for the sake of being contrary, a pointless point.
But that's not the definition. Just cause his definition includes it doesn't mean it is one. And what do I care of Constantine converted? The argument is whether or not Jesus died on a cross and if the symbolism had anything to do with Jesus' death, and Christianity or if it's made up.
The evidence points to it being made up. I'm not "stuck" on anything. Either something happened or it didn't. And if that particular event didn't happen as modern bibles suggest, then the symbol of Christ on a cross is false.
Let’s re-cap: the Bible isn’t modern, it was written during a period covering more than 1500 years. The last book was written about the year 93 A.D, and again, St. Jerome translated it in 382 AD. Crucifixion was a pagan death sentence. The pagan Romans crucified Christ. The cross then became symbolic with Christ. Your contrary interpretation of Greek/ definitions/ others’ contrary interpretations are completely irrelevant. St. Jerome, the Church with the infallible protection of the Holy Ghost, the Third Person of the Triune God! trump you and any silly website you may have dug up for shock value. Now, if you’re done being a contrary snark, the rest of us are going to continue appreciating what GOD has given us. No need for you to reply; it will go ignored and you’ll be babbling to your contrary self.
"The Church" is a creation of the Roman empire. Everything you believe is made up nonsense and most of it from AD from people that had nothing to do with Christ.
Either language matters or it doesn't. And now you resort to writing like you're a 3rd century priest. If you don't understand the problem of correct or incorrect symbology and it's roots, then you're hopeless. And that's okay.
You are literally a pagan and you don't even know it. This is identical to Islam. Identical. Everything about Muhammad was written 200-300 years after his death.
It's unbelievable how stubborn and hard headed people are.