“παρουσία [pa·rou·siʹa] denotes esp[ecially] active presence.”

The word pa·rou·siʹa, “presence,” is different from the Greek word eʹleu·sis, “coming,” which occurs once in the Greek text, in Ac 7:52, as e·leuʹse·os (Lat., ad·venʹtu). The words pa·rou·siʹa and eʹleu·sis are not used interchangeably. TDNT, Vol. V, p. 865, noted that “the terms [paʹrei·mi and pa·rou·siʹa] are never used for the coming of Christ in the flesh, and παρουσία never has the sense of return. The idea of more than one parousia is first found only in the later Church [not before Justine, second century C.E.] . . . A basic prerequisite for understanding the world of thought of primitive Christianity is that we should fully free ourselves from this notion [of more than one parousia].”

Concerning the meaning of this word, Israel P. Warren, D.D., wrote in his work The Parousia, Portland, Maine (1879), pp. 12-15: “We often speak of the ‘second advent,’ the ‘second coming,’ etc., but the Scriptures never speak of a ‘second Parousia.’ Whatever was to be its nature, it was something peculiar, having never occurred before, and being never to occur again. It was to be a presence differing from and superior to all other manifestations of himself to men, so that its designation should properly stand by itself, without any qualifying epithet other than the article,—THE PRESENCE.

“From this view of the word it is evident, I think, that neither the English word ‘coming’ nor the Latin ‘advent’ is the best representative of the original. They do not conform to its etymology; they do not correspond to the idea of the verb from which it is derived; nor could they appropriately be substituted for the more exact word, ‘presence,’ in the cases where the translators used the latter. Nor is the radical [root] idea of them the same. ‘Coming’ and ‘advent’ give most prominently the conception of an approach to us, motion toward us; ‘parousia’ that of being with us, without reference to how it began. The force of the former ends with the arrival; that of the latter begins with it. Those are words of motion; this of rest. The space of time covered by the action of the former is limited, it may be momentary; that of the latter unlimited . . . .

“Had our translators done with this technical word ‘parousia’ as they did with ‘baptisma,’—transferring it unchanged,—or if translated using its exact etymological equivalent, presence, and had it been well understood, as it then would have been, that there is no such thing as a ‘second Presence,’ I believe that the entire doctrine would have been different from what it now is. The phrases, ‘second advent,’ and ‘second coming,’ would never have been heard of. The church would have been taught to speak of THE PRESENCE OF THE LORD, as that from which its hopes were to be realized, whether in the near future or at the remotest period,—that under which the world was to be made new, a resurrection both spiritual and corporeal should be attained, and justice and everlasting awards administered.”

Also, Bauer, p. 630, states that pa·rou·siʹa “became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, esp[ecially] of kings and emperors visiting a province.” In Mt 24:3, as well as in other texts such as 1Th 3:13 and 2Th 2:1, the word pa·rou·siʹa refers to the royal presence of Jesus Christ since his enthronement as King in the last days of this system of things.

Gr., σταυρός (stau·rosʹ); Lat., crux

“Torture stake” in Mt 27:40 is used in connection with the execution of Jesus at Calvary, that is, Skull Place. There is no evidence that the Greek word stau·rosʹ here meant a cross such as the pagans used as a religious symbol for many centuries before Christ.

In the classical Greek the word stau·rosʹ meant merely an upright stake, or pale, or a pile such as is used for a foundation. The verb stau·roʹo meant to fence with pales, to form a stockade, or palisade, and this is the verb used when the mob called for Jesus to be impaled. It was to such a stake, or pale, that the person to be punished was fastened, just as the popular Greek hero Prometheus was represented as tied to rocks. Whereas the Greek word that the dramatist Aeschylus used to describe this simply means to tie or to fasten, the Greek author Lucian (Prometheus, I) used a·na·stau·roʹo as a synonym for that word. In the Christian Greek Scriptures a·na·stau·roʹo occurs but once, in Heb 6:6. The root verb stau·roʹo occurs more than 40 times, and we have rendered it “impale,” with the footnote: “Or, ‘fasten on a stake (pole).’”

The inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures wrote in the common (koi·neʹ) Greek and used the word stau·rosʹ to mean the same thing as in the classical Greek, namely, a simple stake, or pale, without a crossbeam of any kind at any angle. There is no proof to the contrary. The apostles Peter and Paul also use the word xyʹlon to refer to the torture instrument upon which Jesus was nailed, and this shows that it was an upright stake without a crossbeam, for that is what xyʹlon in this special sense means. (Ac 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Ga 3:13; 1Pe 2:24) In LXX we find xyʹlon in Ezr 6:11 (1 Esdras 6:31), and there it is spoken of as a beam on which the violator of law was to be hanged, the same as in Ac 5:30; 10:39.

The Latin dictionary by Lewis and Short gives as the basic meaning of crux “a tree, frame, or other wooden instruments of execution, on which criminals were impaled or hanged.” In the writings of Livy, a Roman historian of the first century B.C.E., crux means a mere stake. “Cross” is only a later meaning of crux. A single stake for impalement of a criminal was called in Latin crux simʹplex. One such instrument of torture is illustrated by Justus Lipsius (1547-1606) in his book De cruce libri tres, Antwerp, 1629, p. 19. The photograph of the crux simplex on our p. 1578 is an actual reproduction from his book.

The book Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung (The Cross and the Crucifixion), by Hermann Fulda, Breslau, 1878, p. 109, says: “Trees were not everywhere available at the places chosen for public execution. So a simple beam was sunk into the ground. On this the outlaws, with hands raised upward and often also with their feet, were bound or nailed.” After submitting much proof, Fulda concludes on pp. 219, 220: “Jesus died on a simple death-stake: In support of this there speak (a) the then customary usage of this means of execution in the Orient, (b) indirectly the history itself of Jesus’ sufferings and (c) many expressions of the early church fathers.”

Paul Wilhelm Schmidt, who was a professor at the University of Basel, in his work Die Geschichte Jesu (The History of Jesus), Vol. 2, Tübingen and Leipzig, 1904, pp. 386-394, made a detailed study of the Greek word stau·rosʹ. On p. 386 of his work he said: “σταυρός [stau·rosʹ] means every upright standing pale or tree trunk.” Concerning the execution of punishment upon Jesus, P. W. Schmidt wrote on pp. 387-389: “Beside scourging, according to the gospel accounts, only the simplest form of Roman crucifixion comes into consideration for the infliction of punishment upon Jesus, the hanging of the unclad body on a stake, which, by the way, Jesus had to carry or drag to the execution place to intensify the disgraceful punishment. . . . Anything other than a simple hanging is ruled out by the wholesale manner in which this execution was often carried out: 2000 at once by Varus (Jos. Ant. XVII 10. 10), by Quadratus (Jewish Wars II 12. 6), by the Procurator Felix (Jewish Wars II 15. 2), by Titus (Jewish Wars VII. 1).”

Evidence is, therefore, completely lacking that Jesus Christ was crucified on two pieces of timber placed at right angles. We do not want to add anything to God’s written Word by inserting the pagan cross-concept into the inspired Scriptures, but render stau·rosʹ and xyʹlon according to the simplest meanings. Since Jesus used stau·rosʹ to represent the suffering and shame or torture of his followers (Mt 16:24), we have translated stau·rosʹ as “torture stake,” to distinguish it from xyʹlon, which we have translated “stake,” or, in the footnote, “tree,” as in Ac 5:30.

[Picture on page 1578]

Crux Simplex Illustrated

Php 1:23—“releasing.” Gr., a·na·lyʹsai; Lat., dis·solʹvi

The verb a·na·lyʹsai is used as a verbal noun here. It occurs only once more in the Christian Greek Scriptures, in Lu 12:36, where it refers to Christ’s return. The related noun a·naʹly·sis occurs once, in 2Ti 4:6, where the apostle says: “The due time for my releasing is imminent.” In Lu 12:36 we have rendered the verb “returns” because it refers to the breaking away and departing of the servants’ master from the wedding feast, so dissolving the feast. But here in Php 1:23 we have not rendered the verb as “returning” or “departing” but as “releasing.” The reason is that the word may convey two thoughts: the apostle’s own releasing to be with Christ at his return and the Lord’s releasing of himself from heavenly restraints to return as he promised.

In no way is the apostle here saying that immediately at his death he would be changed into a spirit to be with Christ forever. Such getting to be with Christ the Lord will first be possible at Christ’s return, when the dead in Christ will rise first, according to the apostle’s own inspired statement in 1Th 4:15-17. It is to this return of Christ and the apostle’s releasing to be always with the Lord that Paul refers in Php 1:23. He says there that two things are immediately possible for him, namely, (1) to live on in the flesh and (2) to die. Because of the circumstances to be considered, he expressed himself as being under pressure from these two things, not making known which thing he would select. Then he presents a third thing, which he really desires. There is no question about his desire for this thing as preferable, namely, “the releasing,” for it means his being with Christ.

Therefore, the expression to a·na·lyʹsai, “the releasing,” cannot be applied to the apostle’s death as a human creature and his departing from this life. It must refer to the events at the time of Christ’s return and presence (see App 5B) and the rising of all those dead in Christ to be with him forever.