The Crucifixion timeline forms a perfect cross on a modern clock when Jewish & Roman times are aligned. This alignment between the Crucifixion Timeline and the Time Clock is a strikingly precise match. **The 3rd Hour (3) → 9:00 AM → Right Side of the Horizontal Beam** According to Mark 15:25, Jesus was crucified at the 3rd hour. When the Crucifixion timeline is aligned onto the 12-hour time clock, the 3rd hour (Jewish time) corresponds to 9:00 AM (Roman time). This places 9:00 AM at the right end of the horizontal beam, aligning it perfectly. **The 6th Hour (6) → 12:00 PM → Top of the Vertical Beam** According to Matthew 27:45, Mark 15:33, and Luke 23:44, darkness fell over the land at the 6th hour (12:00 PM). On the time clock, the 6th hour (Jewish) corresponds to 12:00 PM (Roman). This directly aligns with the top of the vertical beam, reinforcing the divine connection between time and the cross. **The 9th Hour (9) → 3:00 PM → Left Side of the Horizontal Beam** According to Matthew 27:46, Jesus cried out and gave up His spirit at the 9th hour (3:00 PM). On the time clock, the 9th hour (Jewish) corresponds to 3:00 PM (Roman). This places 3:00 PM at the left end of the horizontal beam, again aligning perfectly. A look at the pictorial depiction of the convergence of The Roman and Jewish Timelines: The beams intersect at the clock’s center The convergence of Crucifixion timelines form a perfect Cross: The ultimate symbol of Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Salvation **Significance of This Alignment** The Cross, the Crucifixion Timeline, and the 12-hour Time Clock all merge into one divinely synchronized pattern. This means that the crucifixion was not random, but rather, the sacrifice was preordained in time itself. The alignment of 3, 6, and 9 across the cross and time clock further strengthens the divine trinity of numbers. The Crucifixion follows the 3–6–9 cycle, reinforcing God’s presence in both time and salvation. This convergence of The Roman and Jewish timelines (the 2 nations responsible for the crucifixion), lays the foundation for the proof. ________________ The Holy Trinity: A single God existing as three identical entities. In the concept of The Trinity, Three and One are the same. Trinity of Numbers: A single number existing as three identical entities. » 1 1 1 » 2 2 2 » 3 3 3 » 6 6 6 » 9 9 9 ____________________ I. THE MAGNIFICENCE OF 3 6 9: THE TRINITY OF NUMBERS The Digital Root of any Trinity of Numbers united into an integer is either 3, 6 , or 9. 111 » 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 222 » 2 + 2 + 2 = 6 333 » 3 + 3 + 3 = 9 444 » 4 + 4 + 4 = 12 » 1 + 2 = 3 555 » 5 + 5 + 5 = 15 » 1 + 5 = 6 666 » 6 + 6 + 6 = 18 » 1 + 8 = 9 131313 »13+13+13=39» 3+9 = 12 » 1+2 = 3 141414 » 14 + 14 + 14 = 42 » 4 + 2 =6 151515 » 15 + 15 + 15 = 45 » 4 + 5 = 9 The recurring sequence 3 6 9 is magnificent for its representation of The Truth: THE HOLY TRINITY !!! [![The 3-6-9 digital root cycle]] **Romans 5:6** When The Cross is fixed into a Time Clock, the co-ordinates are 3 6 9 and 12. The Cross is comprised of three entities: 3, 6, 9 - each representing an entity of the Trinity respectively, and a single head that unifies all three (The GodHead\God = 12; 1 Corinthians 11:3). The cross itself, when fixed into a time clock and aligned with the coordinates 3, 6, 9, and 12, symbolizes not only the distinct persons of the Trinity but also the unity of the three in one Godhead. This beautifully tied together the Trinity, the structure of time, and the Godhead. The time clock itself becomes a tool to reveal divine order and structure. The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = 3 + 6 + 9 = 18 » 1 + 8 = 9 God = 12 » 1 + 2 = 3 _________ The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = 9 God = 3 The Resulting Numbers are 3 & 9 9 is comprised of three 3s. 9 ≡ 3 3 3 i.e. a single God existing as three identical entities. [![Nine in three places: Three, Three, Three]] The Mathematical Unification of the Trinity: The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — represented by 3, 6, and 9 — combine and reveal the Godhead through the process of digital root. The Trinity: Father (3) + Son (6) + Holy Spirit (9) = 18 The digital root of 18 is: 1 + 8 = 9. This shows that when the three persons of the Trinity are united, their sum leads to 9, the digital root. The Godhead (12): This also equates God to 12 (the unifying Godhead, as you’ve pointed out earlier). The digital root of 12 is: 1 + 2 = 3. This shows that God as the unified whole is also represented by 3. Reconciliation of the Two: The sum of the Trinity (3 + 6 + 9) gives 9, and the digital root of God (12) gives 3. This leads to the conclusion that 9 (which represents the sum of the Trinity) equals three 3s (9 ≡ 3 3 3), highlighting the threefold unity of God. Symbolism of the Numbers 3 and 9: 9 ≡ 3 3 3 is a powerful statement, symbolizing the unity and the perfection of God through the Trinity. The three 3s show that God exists as three identical entities (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) united as one, consistent with the biblical revelation of one God in three persons. When all components of The Cross are united to become an ultimate unit by deriving the digital root of sum, the result is: God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = 3 + 9 = 12 » 1 + 2 = 3[God] God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = God **THE GOD EQUATION** Three has been united as One. The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit exist as distinct yet coequal hypostases within the divine essence, such that their individual distinctions neither augment nor diminish the totality of God’s being, but rather subsist harmoniously within the indivisible unity of the Godhead. The final result of adding all these components (the Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and God) together and deriving the digital root is 3 — which is the same as the digital root of God (12 → 1 + 2 = 3). This shows that, no matter how you break it down, God is one. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all unified in God. Their sum reflects the ultimate oneness of God. THE GOD EQUATION beautifully demonstrates the theological truth that the Trinity is one God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct, but when united, they reveal the singular essence of God — represented by 3, the digital root of unity. Symbolism: The fact that the sum of the components leads to 3 symbolizes the perfect unity of the Trinity. This reinforces the concept that, while there are three persons, there is only one God — a deeply meaningful and profound truth in Christian theology. The proof shows how the Trinity is mathematically and symbolically united as one, emphasizing the oneness of God in a beautifully structured way ____________ **3 3 3 vs. 6 6 6: The Divine vs. The Counterfeit** We established that 3 3 3 represents the Holy Trinity — The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit — perfectly united as one God. Now, let’s examine how this contrasts with Revelation 13:18 and Isaiah 14:14. 1. Revelation 13:18 — The Number of the Beast (666) “This calls for wisdom: Let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.” (Revelation 13:18, ESV) 666 represents a counterfeit trinity — a perversion of 3 3 3. Where God’s nature is holy perfection (3 3 3), 6 6 6 is an unholy imitation. How? The Father (3) → Counterfeited by Satan (the ultimate deceiver). The Son (6) → Counterfeited by the Antichrist (a false messiah). The Holy Spirit (9) → Counterfeited by the False Prophet (a deceiving spirit). 666 = the ultimate imperfection, trying but failing to be God. 2. Isaiah 14:14 — Lucifer’s Rebellion “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.” (Isaiah 14:14, ESV) Satan’s ambition was to become like God. But instead of 3 3 3 (divine unity), he creates 6 6 6 (a false unity, leading to chaos). The pattern is clear: 3 3 3 = God’s perfect Trinity. 6 6 6 = Satan’s counterfeit trinity, a failed attempt to replace God. The Inversion of 9 (The Holy Spirit) → 6 (The Antichrist) Remember: In The Proof, the Holy Spirit is symbolized by 9. When 9 is inverted, it becomes 6. Luke 1:35 says The Son was conceived by the Holy Spirit. The Antichrist (6) is a perversion of Christ (who originates from 9, the Holy Spirit). Satan twists divine order: 3 3 3 = Holy Trinity → 6 6 6 = Unholy Trinity. 9 (The Holy Spirit) → Inverted to 6 (Antichrist). The Cross (a symbol of salvation) → Inverted Cross (a satanic symbol). ???? Just as the Cross (salvation) can be inverted into an occult symbol, the true divine structure (3 3 3) is inverted into its opposite (6 6 6). The Battle of Divine Order vs. Chaos 3 3 3 represents God’s perfect unity and divine order. 6 6 6 is the ultimate rebellion, a failed imitation of God’s truth. The Ultimate Divine Signature 3 3 3 is the Holy Trinity, the true nature of God. 9 (Three 3s) represents divine completion. 6 6 6 is the counterfeit, a distortion that leads to deception. The universe, scripture, time, and mathematics all align to reveal God’s divine order. ____________________ The Cross (formed by time: Jewish-Roman timelines) + THE GOD EQUATION (expressing divine ontology) = A Unified Proof of the Trinity. The Unbreakable Link: Time + Equation = Proof **A. The Cross Validates the Equation** The crucifixion’s 3–6–9 timeline forms a crucifixion cross on the time clock and manifests the Trinity’s equation in history: The cross-shape is physical evidence that God’s triune nature is embedded in creation. **B. The Equation Explains the Cross** Why did the crucifixion align with 3–6–9? Because: God +The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = God It is the 3-6-9 digital root cycle (demonstrated earlier) that enables the culmination of the proof: THE GOD EQUATION. Christ’s sacrifice is the Trinity’s eternal equation unfolding in time. **C. Closed System of Truth** Historical Event (Cross in Time) → Mathematical Law (3–6–9 Cycle) → Theological Reality (God Equation). All three are interdependent: Remove one, and the system collapses. The Three Pillars Interlock Pillar, Role in the Proof, Dependency **Historical (Crucifixion timeline: 3rd, 6th, 9th hours)** Provides the factual anchor: the cross-shape on the clock. Requires the Gospels' accuracy about the hours. **Mathematical (3–6–9 cycle, God Equation)** Reveals the pattern: digital roots and divine arithmetic. Depends on the historical hours to avoid numerology. **Theological (Trinity as 3–6–9)**Supplies the meaning: why the numbers matter. Needs math/history to escape subjectivity. Q:Is this circular reasoning?" A: No - it's convergent evidence: History records the hours. Math reveals their pattern. Theology interprets their meaning. The coherence of all three points to design. Conclusion: The Triune Signature The Cross in Time and the God Equation are not separate proofs - they are two expressions of one reality: At the intersection of time and eternity, the Trinity inscribed its name:  - In history: as a cross.  - In mathematics: as an equation. Both declare: God is. ___________ 1. **On base-10 being “human convention.”** The 3-6-9 cycle is dependent on base-10, but base-10 is not arbitrary. It is grounded in our very biology: human beings universally possess 10 fingers, which became the natural foundation of counting systems across cultures. Far from being an artificial convention, it is a biologically universal standard written into the human form itself. That universality, emerging from our design, is precisely why patterns within base-10 matter. They are not imposed; they arise from the way human beings are structured to engage with number. 2. **On modular arithmetic and “casting out nines.”** Yes, the patterns are mathematically predictable. But predictability does not diminish significance, it enhances it. The 3-6-9 cycle is not a “hidden trick”; it is an intrinsic feature of how base-10 arithmetic expresses balance and repetition. The fact that this cycle exists necessarily, not accidentally, shows we are looking at a structural law of number. When such a mathematical necessity converges with biblical history (the 3rd, 6th, and 9th hours of the crucifixion) and theology (the Triune God), the weight lies not in subjectivity but in convergence across independent domains. **3. On the crucifixion hours as “devotional” not “evidential.”** The evangelists indeed recorded hours historically. Yet the fact remains: those particular hours, 3, 6, and 9, were chosen by history, not by me. If the records had said 2, 5, and 8, there would be no alignment. But they did not. They aligned exactly with the 3-6-9 cycle that mathematics already reveals, and with the Trinity’s triune structure. That is not selective interpretation, it is convergence that no single human planned. **4. On arbitrariness and selectivity.** A proof’s strength lies in independence. What could be called “arbitrary” is in fact the opposite: theology, mathematics, and history developed in isolation, without collusion. Their meeting point at the pattern of three is unplanned, and that is exactly why it is powerful. If one system were constructed to mirror another, we could dismiss it as human design. But because they are independent, convergence becomes the very evidence of higher design. **5. On revelation vs. numerology.** Theology rests on revelation. But why should mathematics, which is itself a universal language of order, not bear witness to the same God who authored Scripture? Revelation is not confined to text; creation itself testifies (Romans 1:20). What I have shown is not a replacement for revelation, but a parallel witness: numbers, history, and doctrine each speak in harmony. 6. The God Equation as perfect representation. Consider the equation: God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = God At first glance, this seems impossible, addition should increase. But in divine logic, each hypostasis is fully God, and yet their sum is not “three Gods” but one. This paradox is not a human invention; it is mirrored in the 3-6-9 cycle itself: a triune sequence that repeats yet remains one unbroken system. The God Equation crystallizes the Trinity mathematically: plurality without division, unity without collapse. **Conclusion.** The very fact that biology (10 fingers), mathematics (3-6-9 digital roots), history (crucifixion hours), and theology (Trinity) converge on the same triadic pattern, without human orchestration, transforms symbolism into testimony. Do not understate the weight of the convergence. The framework is not just “internally consistent but symbolic.” The point is this: it is not I who created the framework. History (the crucifixion timeline), mathematics (the 3-6-9 cycle), and theology (the Trinity) already existed independently. They converged on their own, across disciplines that are not supposed to “speak” to one another. When all three interlock with such specificity—the very hours of the central event of Christianity forming a perfect cross that aligns with a mathematical cycle mirroring the Triune nature of God, it transcends mere “symbolic synthesis.” This kind of uninvited, cross-domain coherence is exactly what we look for in arguments for design. We don’t dismiss the fine-tuning of the universe’s physical constants because the theory is “elegant”; we recognize that the elegance points to a deeper reality. Therefore, the task is not simply to label this “symbolism” and walk away. The burden is to provide a plausible, naturalistic explanation for why this specific, multi-layered alignment exists at all. Until that is offered, the inference to design remains the only explanation for a pattern that looks less like a metaphor and more like a signature. That is what makes it more than symbolism. If it were only theology, it would be faith. If it were only math, it could be dismissed as numerology. If it were only history, it would remain anecdotal. But when all three interlock, uninvited, it pushes beyond mere metaphor. So yes, coherence is achieved. But coherence across independent domains begins to smell like design. The task is not only to say “symbolism” but to explain why this particular alignment exists at all. The strength lies precisely in the unplanned convergence across independent systems. This is not a numerological curiosity. It is the echo of the same truth, refracted through multiple lenses, all resolving to one: The Triune God. ____________________ SPACE & TIME [![A picture of the solar system]] Design is an inherent and integral component of the solar system. And since design is fundamental to the solar system, its definition must be rooted in design. The IAU'S definition of the solar system makes no provision for this. ​ IAU's definition: >>> Is in orbit around the Sun, >>> has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape) >>> has "cleared the neighbourhood" around its orbit. ​ The new, true and improved definition: ✅ Orbits the Sun as its primary gravitational influence. ✅ Is spherical due to self-gravity (hydrostatic equilibrium). ✅ Has a built-in orbital safety mechanism that ensures long-term stability. ​ The gravitational relationship between Pluto and Neptune, where they are in a 3:2 orbital resonance. As you can see, this definition makes room for design by way of mechanism. ​ And when we go by this definition, we establish 9 planets on our solar system, taking us right to our previous and accurate count of 9 planets with Earth as the third (3 & 9) - establishing the intelligent design of the system. _________________ Recall the foundational significance of 3 & 9 in the proof _________________ The Earth is the 3rd of 9 Planets. The Resulting Numbers are 3 & 9. 9 is comprised of three 3s. 9 ≡ 3 3 3 The Triune God is The Creator of the Heavens & the Earth. ______________________________ THE WORD The Bible is comprised of The Old Testament and The New Testament. The Old Testament is comprised of 39 books while The New Testament is comprised of 27 books. The Old Testament : 39 The New Testament : 27 Derive the Digital Roots: 39 » 3 + 9 = 12 » 1 + 2 = 3 27 » 2 + 7 = 9 The Resulting Numbers are 3 & 9 9 is comprised of three 3s. 9 ≡ 3 3 3 ⇛The Bible is a historical book written by Man under the inspiration of God. __________________________ THE FIRST & THE LAST [Revelation 22:13] Man was designed to use the Base 10 Numeral System. [![10 fingers]] Consisting of 10 digits: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 1 is The First or The Beginning Number and The Triune Number 9 is The Highest or The Last. 1---2 3 4 5 6 7 8---9 [3 3 3] ⇛God is The First and He is The Last. ⇛He is The Beginning and He is The End. ⇛He is One and He is a Trinity. ________________________ Abductive reasoning asks: What best explains the evidence? The evidence here is: Crucifixion at 3rd, 6th, 9th hours (Gospel unanimity). These hours form a perfect cross on any 12-interval dial. These numbers follow the 3-6-9 digital root cycle. This cycle mirrors the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. Competing hypotheses were implicitly weighed: H1 (Design): A divine mind encoded theological truth in historical and mathematical patterns. H2 (Chance): The alignment is coincidental. H1 is favored because: It offers a unifying explanation. It aligns with the specificity of the data (3-6-9, not 2-5-8). It reflects historical and cultural context (Jewish liturgical hours). This is not confirmation bias—it is inference to the best explanation. ___________ Although there are several segments to this proof, the task should be to explain why this particular alignment between Mathematics, Theology and Time exists at all.

1. [Anastasis • Resurrection](https://dzen.ru/a/ZXNFALUrMW9CfeYc) https://www.pravenc.ru/text/2459015.html 2. I am not really sure if this is Christian. Some say it is. https://herculaneum.uk/Ins%205/Herculaneum%205%2015%20p4.htm 3. https://www.livescience.com/42761-ancient-church-mosaics-uncovered-israel.html 3. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croix_(christianisme) 4. https://www.pravenc.ru/text/2459015.html 5. [Mosaics of the Basilica, mid-6th century CE, inside the Memorial Church of Moses, Mount Nebo, Jordan](https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mosaics_of_the_Basilica,_mid-6th_century_CE,_inside_the_Memorial_Church_of_Moses,_Mount_Nebo,_Jordan.jpg) Why are there so many cross variants, and are there ancient writers that describes them? Why do we see so rare in the early time the standard latin cross without enlarged ends? But instead we see with enlarged ends. Thanks in advance.

1. Why did they enlarge the ends of the crosses in early time from the time of Constantine, since we see coins with such cross? Thanks in advance. [Amazing colorful mosaics at the basilica of Almyrida, of the early byzantine era (6th century bC), in Apokoronas, Crete, Greece.](https://www.alamy.com/amazing-colorful-mosaics-at-the-basilica-of-almyrida-of-the-early-byzantine-era-6th-century-bc-in-apokoronas-crete-greece-image568479165.html) [Croix Christianisme (Wikipedia)](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croix_(christianisme)) [The Christogram in the mosaic may look like a cross, but it's actually more like a "chi rho" symbol, which puts together the first two captial letters in the Greek word for Christ.](https://www.livescience.com/42761-ancient-church-mosaics-uncovered-israel.html) https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/see-the-greek-biblical-inscription-embedded-in-an-ancient-mosaic-floor-discovered-in-israel-180985849/ https://wowcappadocia.com/aidesim-mosaic-basilica.html https://www.dailysabah.com/history/2017/03/03/1600-year-old-byzantine-mosaics-in-kilis-to-attract-tourists [A Church Beyond Compare - The Nea Church, or the Basilica of Saint Mary the New in Jerusalem (543-614)](https://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2017/11/a-church-beyond-compare-nea-church-or.html) https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine/t.html I mean this - the enlarged ends of the crosses. It looks like the ankh and the equal sided cross from the near east have enlarged ends, not exactly sure why, there is similarity. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/353884483203978736/ https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine/t.html How can there be sol invictus with Christian cross? [Ancient Numismatic Coins](http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.7.tic.45?lang=hu)

Catholic tradition tells us that Jesus fell three times under the weight of the cross on His way to Calvary. I wish to know if any studies based on historical evidence have been conducted by Catholic Church on the dimensions and weight of the cross that Jesus bore. For instance, was the cross made of dry wood or out of freshly felled tree ?

In the approbation given the 1854 edition of St. Alphonsus Liguori's [*Preparation for Death (or Considerations on the Eternal Maxims)*](https://ia803105.us.archive.org/20/items/preparationforde00ligu/preparationforde00ligu.pdf) one finds: QUESTION: Does anyone know the name of this cross? It seems neither to be an iron cross nor a maltese cross. I would like to know what it is called because I am hoping to reproduce it with LaTeX and make use of it in a current work of mine. Thank you.

Was Jesus The Lamb of God or the High Priest (whom offers the lamb as a sacriffice)? John the baptist said " Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" John 1:19 And in Hebrews 4:14 it is written "Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God".

Horatio G. Stafford wrote lyrics for the hymn that has the chorus, ***"It is well, it is well with my soul"***. It may be more quickly recognised by that chorus than its title, *"It Is Well".* Verse 3 starts off well, and ends well, but there's a bit in the middle that disturbs me (put in bold) as this seems to show a muddling up of two different theological points about what happened at the cross. Here is all of verse 3: > My sin, O the bliss of this glorious thought! > > **My sin**, not in part but in whole, > > **Is nailed to His cross**, and I bear it no more: > > Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul! But does not Colossians 2:14 state that it was the handwriting of ordinances which were contrary to us that was nailed to the cross, removing them - "in whole"? Yes, 1 Peter 2:24 says that Christ, on the tree, bore in his own body our sins. However, the handwritten commands were perfect, not sinful, yet the time came for them to be removed. This seems to have happened alongside Christ bearing our sins in his body on the tree. That which was not perfect (our sins) was borne by Christ in his body, while the perfect law of God was nailed to the cross, to be removed. Does this not conflate those two truths, by fusing bits of both together, so that both truths are corrupted? Our sins are ours, personally. The law of God is perfect and is his. Is it not critically important for the sake of biblical theology to know how both those things were dealt with - one nailed to the cross, the other borne in Christ's body? (Note: this related question deals with Colossians 2:14 and may be helpful in clarifying the doctrine of that scripture, but it does not deal with the hymn in question and the other scripture it incorporates. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/80218/whose-hand-wrote-the-document-that-listed-my-transgressions-colossians-214 )

Jehovah's Witnesses unlike any other Christian sects believe that Jesus Christ was not crucified on a cross but was instead crucified on a torture stake, did the Early Church Fathers believe that Jesus was crucified on a cross or on a stake?

The Jehovah's Witnesses state that Jesus was not nailed on a cross, but on a torture stake. The New World Translation of the Bible is phrased accordingly. For example: > **Matthew 10:38 (NWT)** > And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. (All the other translations (that I know of) translate *cross* instead.) What is significant about the difference between a **torture stake** and a **cross**, and on which one was Jesus crucified? --- An illustration of what might be a *torture stake:*

Master Jesus was crucified on a tree, according to Apostle Peter. >**Acts 5:30** 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and **hanged on a tree**. >**Acts 10:39** 39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and **hanged on a tree**: >**Acts 13:29** 29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, **they took him down from the tree**, and laid him in a sepulchre. >**1 Peter 2:24** 24 Who his own self bare our sins in **his own body on the tree**, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. On some accounts, He was crucified on the cross. >**Matthew 27:40** 40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down **from the cross.** >**Matthew 27:42** 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 15:30** 30 Save thyself, and come down **from the cross.** >**Mark 15:32** 32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now **from the cross**, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him. >**Luke 23:26** 26 And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, and **on him they laid the cross**, that he might bear it after Jesus. >**John 19:19** 19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it **on the cross**. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

The plain Cross is perhaps the most frequently used symbol on the earth. One can see a distinct pattern in the dimensions of the horizontal and vertical beams of the Cross . Many years ago, I heard that the ideal ratio of the length of the vertical arm and each of the horizontal arms measured from the junction is 2:3. To elaborate, if the vertical arm above the junction is two feet long, each of the horizontal arms should be of three feet. One is not sure if a proportion is fixed for the vertical beam running downwards from the junction. The question is :Is there a standard ratio fixed for the dimensions of arms of the plain Cross ? If there is one, does it have a historical backdrop, or is it just a matter of aesthetic considerations ? PS: a typical example of aesthetic considerations is the dimensions of National Flags. The Indian National Flag has the prescribed ratio of 2:3 for width and length. The American Flag has 1:1.9 .The ratio is determined by the features of the flag and the prospects of the best look.

Apropos [Ken Graham's Question of 18th August](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/96729/looking-for-sources-of-mediaeval-church-architecture-that-shows-and-or-explains) on medieval church architecture. One rarely comes across literature on the big crosses constructed around churches. For instance, you find an obelisk, a construction that traces its origin to Egyptian culture, at the centre of St Peter's Square, Rome. Of course, it has a cross on the top. Curious enough, the churches of Southern India, some of which trace their origin to the first century, have such peculiar constructions. St Thomas, the Apostle is believed to have reached India in 52 AD and established a few churches. The Portuguese who landed in 1498 rebuilt many such ancient churches, supplementing the local architecture with their own (See [Christianity in Kerala: Church Architecture](https://www.keralatourism.org/christianity/church-architecture/24)) . One particular feature is that of three crosses on a pedestal—erected on the south, north, and west of prominent churches, which almost invariably faced east. Some of these crosses, erected at a distance of say, half a mile, from the church, are accompanied by a small chapel locally called 'Kappela', the word tracing its root to the Portuguese language. These chapels would not host the Holy Eucharist and would be used for devotions like rosary and novena. Historians say that the construction of such an extension of the main church by way of crosses, was in vogue even before the arrival of the Portuguese since some of them have inscriptions in Syriac language. That would imply that the custom had originated with the Jews or any other people like the Chinese, Persians, and Arabs who had settled in India for trade. I am not aware if the tradition can be seen in the West. From where did the tradition of erecting three crosses around a church originate?

According to An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 256. : >The shape of the [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 cent. 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.” There are many other references that agree that prior to 3rd or 4th century only non Christian groups ever used the symbol of the cross in their worship. There is also the matter of whether or not Jesus was put to death on a cross or a single upright stake as the Ancient Greek words stauros indicates. Thus I am asking: How does the Catholic Church explain the cross becoming acceptable to use and venerate as a symbol of Christianity?

In the following YouTube video clip (Messe à Notre-Dame de Paris du 20 janvier 2019 ) in which it is clearly visible that the priest celebrating mass in the Paris Notre Dame is wearing some kind of *Order* or special 5-star or cross medallion. What is this cross or star? What does it mean?

On the Crosses in Parishes, Cathedrals, Rosaries, and any other place that there is a Catholic image of a Cross, you will find Jesus on the cross. But this is not true for Eastern Orthodox or Protestant groups. Why is this? Related: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/5476/why-the-difference-in-depiction-of-the-cross-between-catholics-and-protestants

Notice the bottom of the cross, with the diagonal line. What does it represent/symbolize (if anything)?

I was wondering if there are any prominent or otherwise named group of Christians who believe that Jesus did away with our debt by legally canceling our debt instead of actually paying for the entire amount due. In other words, are there those who believe that it wasn't required that Jesus' suffering was equal to or exceeded all the suffering of punishment that each one of us is due because he dealt away with the legal requirement, period, through the cross? This follows from passages like Col 2:14 where the consequences of our trespasses are merely set aside because of Christ's offering at the Cross: >Colossians 2:13-14 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us [liberating us from] all our trespasses, 14 **by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.** (ESV) See also Romans 7:1-6 where our freedom from the legal obligation to be punished by law for sin is effectuated in Christ's death the same way that woman may be freed from the legal obligation to her husband through death. >Romans 7:1-6 ​Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? 2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. 3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress. > >4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. (ESV) And Ephesians which describes the law being abolished in Christ's flesh. >Ephesians 2:14-16 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and **has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances,** that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby **killing the hostility.** (ESV)

David Thurman in his book, "From Vines to Wines in Classical Rome " writes about a very common first century practice (testified by Pliny and Columella) of establishing vineyards with a post and a single cross bar, from 4 to 7 feet high, with (among other options) reeds acting as wires connecting vine branches with the props (posts) for a trellis system. This understanding from Pliny & Columella in the first century, of how a typical trellis system was set up, goes against the conventional understanding of vineyard management in Bible times. For example, John Dominic Crossan depicts sprawling grape vines on the ground in his, "Interpretive painting of first century Nazareth. The view from the ridge ." (scroll down to the 5th picture) - Illustration from Crossan and Reed, Excavating Jesus (2003). It occurred to me that a high wooden prop (post) with a cross bar would look very much like a cross with a grape vine draped over it, especially if sheep or other animals were to eat the leaves below. The significance is that, if Jesus were walking past vineyards speaking about the vine and branches, it would be a very cruciformish experience. That is to say, it would have an added existential impact of being both Christ centered and cross focused - e.g. believers connect with Christ on the cross to bear spiritual fruit. The Gospel of John was composed in Ephesus and universally ascribed by the custodians of the early canon to John the son of Zebedee - an eyewitness of Jesus. Ephesus was an area known for grape growing. When Anthony entered the city of Ephesus, Plutarch says, “women arrayed like Bacchanals, and men and boys like Satyrs and Pans led the way before him and the city was full of ivy and thyruswands and harps and pipes and flutes, the people hailing him as Dionysus, giver of Joy and Beneficent.” Some have argued that both Osiris and Dionysus were hung on trees and crosses. If so, the *praeparatio evangelica* impact of John 15 in relationship to a crucifixion, would be an extraordinary illustration for the initial readers of the Gospel - who were coming from a Dionysian background. Here is an example of a modern trellis system in Baja Mexico that looks like a cross. It would be similar to those in Bible times. However, in Bible times, the grape vines would have been higher up on the trellis wires (reeds in this case). They would appear draped around the cross bar post like linens on a cross during Holy Week. What are the earliest artistic examples of grape vines depicted on a cross in church history? A modern Easter clip art example can be found here. Are there other examples of a modern trellis system post looking like a cross, besides the one in Baja Mexico? Postscript: **Sheep have been used by "wine shepherds" to do leaf thinning, eating suckers off the vines, fertilizing and eating cover crops, etc. It is highly likely that they were used in Bible times for crop management. Therefore Crossan's view of ground sprawling vines is a dubious portrayal of viticulture in Nazareth. Jesus growing up in Nazareth, where a first century wine press has been found, would likely have been familiar with raising sheep in a vineyard context. The picture below shows sheep in a vineyard. Although pigs, not being kosher, would not have been raised by Jesus! Also, goats are too aggressive with the vines and so the sheep would need to be separated from them.* *

Mary is the mother of Jesus. Salome is mentioned twice in Scripture. >There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome; Mark 15:40 >And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, G4539 had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. Mark 16:1 Even though she is only mentioned twice, it appears the assumption is Salome is Mary's sister. >Σαλώμη (Hebrew 'peaceful'), Σαλωμης, ἡ, Salome, the wife of Zebedee, and the mother of the apostles James the elder and John: Mark 15:40; Mark 16:1. Thayers Here is one explanation of the relationship by comparing gospel accounts at the cross. >We further notice that, the name of the Virgin-Mother being omitted, the other three are the same as mentioned by St. John; only, Mary of Clopas is now described as ‘the mother of James and Jose,’6124 and Christ’s Mother’s Sister’ as ‘Solome’6125 and ‘the mother of Zebedee’s children.’6126 Thus Salome, the wife of Zebedee and St. John’s mother, was the sister of the Virgin, and the beloved disciple the cousin (on the mother’s side) of Jesus, and the nephew of the Virgin. This also helps to explain why the care of the Mother had been entrusted to him. -source- So, were Mary and Salome sisters? What would a denomination (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant) survey say? PS. As a bit of background, some will say that Elizabeth (mother of John the Baptist) and Mary were either sisters or cousins (related somehow by blood). Perhaps then, another question to ponder, whether Elizabeth, Mary, and Salome were all blood sisters.

I understand "knowing Jesus" as understanding Jesus who accepts the Cross, ie reasons why He did it and the suffering He took upon himself. And when I accept Him, I accept that suffering, ie I accept the possibility of the same burden to receive salvation. I can't comprehend letting someone suffer for me. I feel evil accepting His suffering for mine. I don't know if that is wrong since protestants claim I should accept (legally) his sacrifice or I go the hell. That is my core belief. Maybe it's the God complex or my ego. But I really want to understand this. Simply, my intuition prevents me from blindly believing that I have to just accept His sacrifice and be happy that he is suffering for me and not me. How can I stand in front of Him without shame after that?