Mr7 said:
Considering that 'The Passion' is not even based on the Scriptures, but on two fictional accounts by Catholic Nuns, I would not expect the films producers to have examined the meaning of the original Greek (Koine) terms used in the Gospels.

And neither did Prince. By the way, the diaries of 2 Catholic nuns are no more fictitious than the "teachings" of Larry Graham & his ilk. Then again, you seem more concerned with how he died than why, so you've got your own issues...Jesus died on a cross.

The partial quotes and scholarly references that you & other JW's base your ideas were dismissed years ago by anyone not so foolish as to base their religious beliefs on the constantly shifting views of a corporation and publishing company. Let's have a little history and vocabulary lesson:

CROSS (Gk. stauros, a "stake"; Lat. crux).
The cross that was used as an instrument of death was either a plain vertical stake to which the victim was fastened, with the hands tied or nailed above the head, or such a stake provided with a crossbar, to which the victim was fastened with the arms outstretched. Of this crossbar three varieties were known, so that there were four forms of the cross:
(1) simple (Lat. simplex), (shaped like a lower case "t"), on which it seems likely that Jesus died for our sins, because of the notice placed above His head (Mt. 27:37)[/b]
(2) St. Andrew's (decussata), which is shaped like a capital "X"
(3) St. Anthony's (commissa), which has the crossbeam at the top (shaped like a capital "T")
(4) the Latin (immissa),. the so-called Greek cross which has the crossbeam in the center (shaped like a plus sign).

You claim that "stauros" in both the classical Greek and Koine carries no thought of a "cross" made of two timbers, but instead it carries the notion of only an upright stake, a pale, pile, or pole. When the Greek lexicons are checked, one finds this is not the case. Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich’s A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament states: "...a stake sunk into the earth in an upright position; a cross-piece was often attached to its upper part, so that it was shaped like a T or thus." Let’s look at a few more Lexicon entries for "cross" (Stauros):

Friberg AGNT Lexicon:
"Stauros" lit. cross, an instrument of capital punishment, an upright pointed stake, oft. w. a crossbeam above it, or intersected by a crossbeam.

Louw-Nida Lexicon:
["Stauros"] a pole stuck into the ground in an upright position with a crosspiece attached to its upper part so that it was shaped like a 'cross.'...reference is probably to the crosspiece of the cross, which normally would have been carried by a man condemned to die/

Barclay Newman Greek Dictionary and Thayer’s Lexicon both read simply: "Stauros" Cross.

The Watchtower Society not only claims that Christ did not die on a cross, your group further states that there is no evidence that a cross with a crossbeam was ever even used by Romans during the first century. They claim the stake was "the then customary usage of this means of execution in the Orient." They maintain, "The evidence is, therefore, completely lacking that Jesus Christ was crucified on two pieces of timber placed at right angles...The passing of time and further archaeological discoveries will be certain to prove its [torture stake] correctness." This last quote was first published in 1969. In 1968, perhaps at the same time the claim was being written, a discovery was made in a dig in Jerusalem that challenges the Watchtower’s argument. This was so devastating to their position, that in the later 1985 edition of the same appendix of the Kingdom Interlinear, the Society discontinued the claim that archaeology would vindicate their claim. What was it that happened that so impacted the archaeological world and caused the Watchtower to remove its claim? Well, in 1968 the remains of a crucified man named Yehoanan were unearthed in Jerusalem dating to the time of Christ.

The book, Archaeological Commentary on the Bible states: "Both heals had been pierced by a single large and crude iron nail. His open arms had been nailed in the way shown in the traditional crucifixion paintings..."

There is a strong Biblical basis for assuming a cross beam:
NAS John 20:25 The other disciples therefore were saying to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I shall see in His hands the imprint of the nails [plural], and put my finger into the place of the nails [plural], and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.

You will notice in this passage the word "nails," this is in the plural suggesting each hand was nailed seperately to a cross beam. You might also notice in JW literature images of Jesus hanging on a cross with one (singular) nail through his wrist/hands. In the Kingdom Interlinear, on page 1150 their version of the cross/stake is presented by Justus Lipsiusin11 (A.D. 1547 - 1606) in his book "De cruce libritres" (A.D. 1629, page 19). A smart Jehovah Witness (if there such a thing) will probably point out that the image of that person on the cross in their Kingdom Interlinear is not Jesus. This is correct. If you consult the Watchtower pamphlets 12, or any Watchtower books like t You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth (page 170) you will see this same image depicting Christ nailed to the cross by "one nail." This seems to go against what the Apostle John (who was an eyewitness; 1 John 1:1) saw and what the Apostle Thomas (Matt 10:3) examined (John 20:27), and what they saw was more than one nail, requiring Christ’s hands to be spread apart. But then again, I'm sure that lots of JWs were there at the time too?


In addition, the entire film is spoken in latin to increase the 'mystery' of the piece.

Actually, it's done in both Latin & Aramaic, and more for authenticity than 'mystery,' as those were the prominent languages in that time and in that region. But from your background, I can see where you mighty have a problem with reality.

I would fully expect to see Mary as 'ever virgin' even though Jesus had brothers and sisters and Mary as 'Mother of God' as well ...

Expect what you will. However, if you knew anything about the project, you'd be aware that the film is about the final 12 hours of Jesus' life. How many times his mother got knocked up is hardly relevant, in spite of whatever cheapshots you want to take at Catholicism.
[This message was edited Mon Jul 14 4:02:17 PDT 2003 by doomboogie]

Actually, I hear that Gibson has put subtitles in the film, but that they actually take away from the film. I CAN'T wait to see the film, but I hope he takes out the subtitles and keeps the film completely in Aramaic (spelling).

And the trailer link does not work either.