HISTORICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE CROSS
The historical record of Roman crucifixion is robust, and the evidence overwhelmingly supports the use of a wooden cross as the instrument of Jesus’ execution. Crucifixion was a well-documented Roman practice, reserved for slaves, rebels, and non-citizens, designed to maximize suffering, humiliation, and deterrence. The idea that Jesus was crucified using ropes alone, without a cross, contradicts both primary sources and archaeological findings.
Roman crucifixion typically involved a wooden structure, most commonly a cross consisting of a vertical post (stipes) and a horizontal beam (patibulum). The condemned often carried the patibulum to the execution site, where it was affixed to the stipes. Ancient sources, including Roman historians and writers, describe this process in detail. For example, the Roman philosopher Seneca (c. 4 BCE–65 CE) wrote of crucifixion victims with “outstretched arms” on crosses, noting variations but affirming the use of a crossbeam. Similarly, the historian Tacitus refers to crucifixion as a standard punishment, with victims affixed to wooden structures.
Archaeological evidence further corroborates this. In 1968, a significant discovery in Jerusalem revealed the remains of a crucified man, Yehohanan, from the first century. A seven-inch iron nail was found driven through his heel bone, indicating attachment to a wooden cross. Another find in Cambridgeshire, England, in 2017, confirmed a similar method, with nails securing the victim’s feet to a cross. These findings align with the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion, which describe nails piercing His hands and feet (John 20:25–27).
NON-CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY
Non-Christian sources from the first and second centuries also affirm that Jesus was crucified on a cross. The Jewish historian Josephus, in his Antiquities of the Jews , mentions Jesus’ crucifixion under Pontius Pilate, consistent with Roman practices involving a cross. The Roman historian Tacitus, in Annals, confirms that Jesus was executed by crucifixion, a punishment synonymous with the cross in Roman contexts. Even the satirical Alexamenos Graffito, a Roman caricature mocking a Christian worshipper, depicts a figure on a T-shaped cross, indicating that the cross was widely associated with Jesus’ death by the early second century.
The notion of a rope-based execution lacks any such corroboration. While ropes were sometimes used to bind victims to the cross before nailing (as noted in the Acts of Andrew, where ropes secured the apostle’s arms and feet without nails), there is no evidence of a crucifixion method relying solely on ropes. The Christianity Today hypothesis appears to cherry-pick ambiguous references to ropes in ancient texts, ignoring the broader context of crucifixion as a nailed, cross-based execution.
Early Christian writers consistently describe Jesus’ crucifixion on a cross. Ignatius of Antioch, in his Letter to the Ephesians, likens the cross to a “crane” that lifts believers to God, with the Holy Spirit as the “rope” and faith as the “pulley.” This metaphorical language presupposes a physical cross. Tertullian, in An Answer to the Jews, describes the cross as having a central pole and crossbeam, comparing it to a ship’s mast with a “unicorn” (midway stake). Clement of Alexandria refers to the cross as the “Lord’s sign,” symbolized by the Greek letter tau (T), which represented the cross’s shape.
These early sources, written within a century or two of Jesus’ death, reflect a uniform tradition of crucifixion on a cross. The rope hypothesis, by contrast, emerges from modern speculation, lacking any ancient attestation.
SCRIPTURAL AFFIRMATION OF THE CROSS
The New Testament provides clear evidence that Jesus was crucified on a cross, with nails piercing His hands and feet, fulfilling Old Testament prophecies and establishing the cross as the central symbol of redemption. The rope hypothesis contradicts these texts and undermines their theological significance.
The four Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—describe Jesus’ crucifixion in terms consistent with a cross. John 20:25–27 is particularly explicit, where Thomas demands to see the marks of the nails in Jesus’ hands and side, and Jesus invites him to touch them. The Greek word for “nails” (ἧλος, hēlos) denotes metal spikes, not ropes. Psalm 22:16, prophetically applied to Jesus, speaks of His hands and feet being “pierced,” a term (כָּרָה, karah) that implies a sharp instrument like a nail, not a rope.
The Gospels also describe Jesus carrying the cross (John 19:17) or its crossbeam (Matthew 27:32), consistent with Roman practice. The inscription “King of the Jews” was placed above Jesus’ head (Matthew 27:37), implying a cross with a vertical and horizontal structure, as a rope suspension would not accommodate such a sign. Furthermore, the breaking of the thieves’ legs (John 19:32) to hasten death assumes a cross, where victims pushed up to breathe, a mechanism incompatible with rope suspension.
FULFILLMENT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
The cross fulfills specific Old Testament prophecies that the rope hypothesis cannot account for. Deuteronomy 21:23 declares that anyone “hanged on a tree” is cursed, a passage Paul applies to Jesus in Galatians 3:13: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.’” The Greek word ξύλον (xylon), used here and in Acts 5:30, can mean “tree,” “wood,” or “cross,” but in the context of Roman crucifixion, it refers to the wooden cross. The “tree” imagery connects Jesus’ death to the redemptive act of bearing humanity’s curse, a theological motif that requires a physical wooden structure, not a rope.
Psalm 22, quoted by Jesus on the cross (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”; Matthew 27:46), describes a scene of piercing and public execution, with the victim’s garments divided (v. 18), mirroring the soldiers’ actions (John 19:23–24). Isaiah 53:5 speaks of the Messiah being “pierced for our transgressions,” reinforcing the imagery of nails, not ropes. These prophecies anchor the cross as the instrument of atonement, a truth central to Christian theology.
The cross is not merely a historical detail but a theological necessity. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 1:18, “The word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” The cross symbolizes God’s victory over sin and death, a truth embodied in its physical form. Colossians 2:14–15 declares that Jesus “canceled the record of debt that stood against us” by nailing it to the cross, where He “disarmed the rulers and authorities.” The act of nailing, both literal and metaphorical, underscores the cross’s role as the site of cosmic reconciliation.
A rope-based execution lacks this symbolic weight. Ropes suggest impermanence and flexibility, whereas the cross’s rigid, unyielding structure reflects the enduring, unchanging nature of Christ’s sacrifice. The rope hypothesis thus dilutes the theological power of the cross, reducing it to a speculative anomaly.
From the earliest days of Christianity, the cross was revered as the instrument of salvation and a symbol of faith. Early Christian traditions, art, and practices affirm this, contradicting the rope hypothesis and highlighting its disconnect from historic Christianity.
THE CROSS, FROM THE EARLIEST AGES
By the second century, Christians were making the sign of the cross as a devotional practice. Tertullian, in De Corona (204 CE), describes Christians tracing the cross on their foreheads, a tradition that presupposes its centrality. The Epistle of Barnabas (c. 70–130 CE) interprets the number 318 in Genesis 14:14 as a typological reference to the cross (T = 300) and Jesus (IH = 18), showing early recognition of the cross’s shape and significance.
The cross’s shape, often depicted as a tau or Latin cross, became a visual shorthand for this victory, appearing in catacombs, amulets, and liturgical objects. The rope hypothesis, by contrast, lacks any symbolic resonance in early Christian thought, rendering it alien to the faith’s foundational imagery.
The Christianity Today article’s timing—published on the eve of Resurrection Sunday—suggests more than mere scholarly speculation. It aligns with a historical pattern of subversive ideologies targeting the symbolic imagery of their opponents to weaken their cultural and spiritual authority. By questioning the cross, Christianity Today engages in a form of deconstruction that undermines historic Christianity’s core identity.
Throughout history, regimes and movements have destroyed or reinterpreted symbols to dismantle their opponents’ power. The Soviet Union, for example, systematically erased tsarist imagery after the 1917 Revolution. Statues of tsars were toppled, imperial eagles were replaced with hammers and sickles, and Orthodox icons were confiscated or destroyed to sever Russia’s connection to its Christian past (Orlando Figes, A People’s Tragedy, 1996). This iconoclasm aimed to erase the cultural memory of the old regime, paving the way for Marxist ideology.
Similarly, the Ottoman Empire’s conquest of Constantinople in 1453 involved the desecration of Christian symbols. Hagia Sophia’s mosaics were plastered over, and crosses were replaced with crescents to assert Islamic dominance. The destruction of crosses was not merely aesthetic but a deliberate act to suppress Christian identity.
In modern contexts, the desecration of flags—such as burning national flags during protests—serves a similar purpose. Flags embody collective identity, and their destruction signals rejection of the values they represent. The cross, as Christianity’s preeminent symbol, is a prime target for those seeking to undermine the faith.
DECONSTRUCTION
Christianity Today’s rope hypothesis fits this pattern of symbolic subversion. The cross is not just a historical artifact but the heart of Christian theology, representing Christ’s atonement, victory, and love. By suggesting that Jesus was crucified with ropes, the article challenges this symbol’s legitimacy, sowing doubt among believers and diluting its emotional and spiritual power. The timing, on the cusp of Easter, amplifies this effect, as it disrupts the season when Christians most vividly recall Christ’s passion and resurrection.
This move reflects a broader trend of deconstruction within progressive Christian circles, which often seek to reinterpret or discard historic doctrines to align with modern sensibilities. By questioning the cross, Christianity Today aligns with ideologies that view traditional Christianity as an obstacle to social progress. This mirrors the tactics of secular movements that reinterpret religious symbols to neutralize their influence, such as portraying the cross as a generic symbol of suffering rather than a unique emblem of redemption.
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
The rope hypothesis betrays a discomfort with historic Christianity’s unyielding claims. The cross, with its stark imagery of sacrifice and judgment, confronts modern notions of inclusivity and relativism. By proposing a rope-based execution, Christianity Today sidesteps the cross’s theological weight, offering a sanitized alternative that avoids the scandal of a crucified God. This aligns with the magazine’s recent trajectory, which has increasingly embraced progressive causes at odds with traditional Christian orthodoxy, such as questioning biblical inerrancy or redefining sexual ethics.
THE CROSS AS INDESPENSIBLE
The cross is not a peripheral detail but the cornerstone of Christian faith. Its historical reality, scriptural necessity, and symbolic power make it indispensable. The rope hypothesis, by contrast, is a speculative distraction that fails to engage with the evidence and undermines the gospel’s transformative message.
The cross is inseparable from the resurrection, forming the dual axis of Christian hope. Paul writes, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins” (1 Corinthians 15:17). The cross’s physical reality grounds this hope, as the nail marks in Jesus’ resurrected body (John 20:27) testify to His victory over death. A rope-based execution lacks this tangible link, reducing the crucifixion to an abstract event without the visceral imagery of nails and wood.
For two millennia, Christians have defined themselves by the cross. It adorns churches, inspires hymns, and shapes ethics. The command to “take up your cross” (Matthew 16:24) calls believers to embrace sacrifice and suffering, a call rooted in the cross’s historical and theological reality. The rope hypothesis offers no equivalent, leaving Christians without a symbol to rally around.
In an age of ideological conflict, the cross remains a bulwark against secularism and revisionism. Its enduring presence in art, literature, and public life testifies to its power. By defending the cross, Christians resist attempts to rewrite their history and faith, affirming that “the word of the cross” remains “the power of God” (1 Corinthians 1:18).
Christianity Today’s rope hypothesis is not just historically and scripturally untenable; it is a subversive attempt to undermine Christianity’s central symbol on the eve of its most sacred season. The historical evidence—from Roman sources, archaeology, and early Christian writings—confirms that Jesus was crucified on a cross with nails. The Scriptures, through Gospel accounts and fulfilled prophecies, anchor the cross as the instrument of redemption. Early Christian traditions, from worship practices to relics, elevate the cross as the emblem of salvation. By contrast, the rope hypothesis lacks evidence, theological depth, and cultural resonance.
This hypothesis aligns with historical patterns of iconoclasm, where symbols are targeted to weaken a group’s identity. Christianity Today’s publication reflects a broader agenda to deconstruct historic Christianity, replacing its uncompromising truths with palatable alternatives. Yet the cross endures, its scars testifying to a love that no speculation can erase. As Christians celebrate Resurrection Sunday, they do so under the shadow of the cross—not a rope—proclaiming, with Paul, “Far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Galatians 6:14).
