Samuelsson's extensive personal studies have confirmed what some of us were already aware of--namely, that there is no textual nor historical evidence that the instrument of Christ's execution was a crossbeam.
I applaud him for his candor and honesty in admitting the results of his consideration of the evidence; yet it is clear from his statements that he remains (stubbornly?) ensconced in his traditional belief.
2 comments:
Samuelsson's extensive personal studies have confirmed what some of us were already aware of--namely, that there is no textual nor historical evidence that the instrument of Christ's execution was a crossbeam.
I applaud him for his candor and honesty in admitting the results of his consideration of the evidence; yet it is clear from his statements that he remains (stubbornly?) ensconced in his traditional belief.
Kent
Have you read his entire dissertation? Can you briefly relate why it seems that he continues holding to traditional thought about the cross?
Thanks,
Edgar
Post a Comment