A Voice in the
Wilderness

site navigation

free newsletter

November 27, 2005

Return to: 
Q/A's
Q/A Topics:
the Cross is pagan?

READER QUESTION:
I just received this email from pawcreek ministries. This is quite interesting, as if the hebrew alphabet the word Tau is the Omega in greek and ending in english, this would make the tau "T" cross have always been a Godly symbol and not neccessarily pagan. Hmmm..... read this article and tell me what you think. I know you would know if tau is the last letter of the hebrew alphabet. I am really rather confused after reading this article about the cross symbol. Could it in reality be a christian symbol? I always thought the tau was a pagan symbol. That the catholics when their church came into being that the christians were somewhat jealous of the "T" symbol around the necks of the pagans and just lowered it to make it a christian symbol. This has gotten my curiosity way up.

VW ANSWER:
Hmmm...did I miss something? I didn't see any reference to cross "symbol" in the article (not posted here). It speaks of Jesus being the Aleph/Tav (Heb), Alpha/Omega (Grk), the "beginning and ending, the first and last" (Rev1:11,22:13) How... what we see plainly stated in Revelation, also appears throughout the O.T. with the Hebrew 'Aleph/Tav' characters.

Hebrew Alefbet:

Greek Alphabet:

Notice that the Hebrew Tav looks nothing like a "t" or cross. In fact, both the Tav and Omega have the over-covering appearance to them, with an 'opening' at the bottom...the Tav being more square-looking, and the Omega being the traditional round 'horseshoe' appearance. The "tau" that looks like a "t" is in the -middle- of the -Greek- alphabet (not Hebrew). The greek "tau" is not the same as the Hebrew "tav/tau"... It is not the "end".

(Note: with the Hebrew chart you begin at the upper right, read left, go to the next line to the right, and read left...thus, Tav is at the lower-left; in 'eastern' way of writing, that is the 'end' of the chart)

Also, beware of that pawcreek site...when I clicked on their "statement of faith" they state plainly (they don't bother to hide it like some do) that their beliefs line up with pentecostalism/charismania: they believe the Holy Spirit comes 'after' salvation, not as an integral part (Eph1:13,Rom8:9) ....not to mention the charismatic gifts of healing and such. Beyond that, I didn't read any of their other postings....their 'statement' was enough.

But that the cross is a pagan symbol.... go to Google and search with the words "cross pagan" and you'll come up with tons of stuff. Here's a sampling:

Disclaimer: Inclusion of these links does not mean VW endorses everything you will read at these sites. Glean from the facts they present, but don't necessarily draw their same conclusions.

  • "Origin of the cross...."

  • "The Pagan Cross-Of Tammuz"
    Notice the photos, depictions of the cross, sun and crescent moon, all-combined. The crescent moon would seem to lend credence to the notion that the "Vatican created Islam"

    Especially, notice this one...

    Notice the unmistakable phallic symbology, related to pagan fertility rites.

  • "Is the Celtic Cross a Pagan Symbol?"
    This guy closes by saying "lighten up", but if you read carefully, you see that even he admits to it's pagan roots.

  • How the cross originates from Nimrod's time
As we keep saying, as these links re-iterate, it is worship of the sun and of fertility. The cross (or 'stake') is not a [C]hristian symbol.

But, that Jesus died on one is also not negated by that fact. If the Jews had killed Him, the method would have been by stoning; as they tried to do on a few occasions. (Jn8:59,10:31) But Jesus was 'executed' by Rome, the pagan occupying nation; the global power of the day. When Jesus took on the form of a "servant" (Php2:7-8), His death was the lowliest form possible in those days. Imagine, a Jew dying on a 'pagan' instrument.

Again, as we keep saying.... and if we wish to do things -God's- way, not following paganism: Jesus did not institute the "sign of the cross"! He established the "new covenant" in His blood: the Bread and Cup. (Mt26:28, Mk14:24, Lk22:20, 1Co11:25)

Just to be clear, as the (above) links explain... paganism worships Tammuz with the ancient "Tau" (cross) symbol. But Jesus closes the Scriptures, -clearly- identifying Himself as someone -different- than that paganism. He is the "Beginning and Ending" the "First and Last" the "Alpha and Omega". Notice that John, a Jew, does not record Jesus using the Hebrew "Aleph and Tav". Just wondering: Is that so that there would not be any confusing of the Hebrew "Tav" (last) with the (pagan) "Tau" (in the middle of the greek and prior alphabets...not to mention that which is beyond the scope of this present discussion: the Grk "chi" letter, which looks like a crooked X or cross, alleged by many to have been a symbol for "Christ")?

Jesus is -NOT- the 'child' of the pagan Isis/Horus (madonna/child) depictions and veneration. He is the I AM (Jn8:58), the Creator of the heavens, earth and life (Jn1:3-4), in whom "all things consist" (Col1:17)

He is the one who says, "...behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to what his work shall be." (Rev22:12)

To those who continue to lust after the pagan symbol of the cross, looking for excuses as to why it is okay and 'good', so they can feel justified, warm-n-fuzzy, and 'pious' when they wear it and decorate their environments with it:

It is idolatry! It is time for you to... WAKE UP!

When God condemned Israel for "weeping for Tammuz" (Ezk8:14), was He thus condoning the veneration of Tammuz's symbol, the "Tau" cross?? The Jews of Jesus' day tried this sort of reasoning with other things related to swearing oaths; that the temple and the temple's gold were somehow different; or that there was a difference between the animal being sacrificed vs the altar on which it was offered; and He proclaimed: "Therefore he who swears by the altar, swears by it and by all things on it. He who swears by the temple, swears by it and by Him who dwells in it. And he who swears by Heaven, swears by the throne of God and by Him who sits on it." (Mt23:20-22)

If Jesus, who died on the cross, (but instituted the bread and cup for Himself) said that: is He, thus, condoning the "sign of the cross", even though Tammuz was/is a pagan deity? Don't worship Tammuz, but it's OK to venerate his symbol, the (Tau,"T") cross..??

C'mon... WAKE UP!

Amen!

Q/A -Cross?
How to get rid of idols

[Top]


follow-up: Ezekiel's 'mark'?

READER QUESTION:
I am confused. Reading (above) link: Does he end by endorsing the cross and denouncing Hislop as a valid source?

VW ANSWER:
Perhaps I should have included a 'disclaimer' (which is now included above): just because I was providing links, doesn't mean that 'everything' on those pages can be trusted. They should be read in the context as given...going to Google and doing a WWW 'search'. Whenever a person goes looking for information, one needs to keep one's mental/spiritual 'filters' active, to sift the good from the bad. Like Jesus explaining the "kingdom of Heaven" being like drawing in the fishing net and sorting out the good from the bad. (Mt13:47-48) Don't necessarily draw the conclusions they do....but glean from the facts they present. Not everything in the 'net' is edible....some is downright "rotten".

READER COMMENTS:
"Let me give you one last thing to dwell on. In Ezekial 9, it speaks of a mark that was placed upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof (Eze 9:4). The Pulpit Commentary says that According to the best interpretation of the text the mark seems to have been a cross. According to Harper's Bible Commentary the letter tau in Near Eastern languages could be written as "+" or "T" and so it was not unnatural for early Christian writers, such as Origen and Tertullian, to see in this a type of the cross of Christ. Now remember, it was the Lord who had commanded that the mark (or "T") be placed on the forehead of the righteous. If this was a symbol of Tammuz which God despised, then why would He have this mark put on the foreheads of those men? If the pagans who worshipped Tammuz whose symbol was a cross, as Hislop tells us, then placing this mark on the righteous would be inconsistent when looking at the context, for only eight verses earlier (Eze 8:14) Tammuz worshipped was condemned! [18]

VW ANSWER:
First of all, Ezk9:4 does not say 'what' that mark was. Many also do the same thing regarding Cain, saying that God put a "T" mark (or "x", depending on who is doing the pontificating) on him. (Gen4:15) Regarding Ezk9:4 they will take the Heb letter "Tav" that is part of that word "mark" in that verse and say, See? the Tau "T"? But if you looked at the Hebrew Alefbet chart, the Hebrew Tav is -NOT- a "T"....it is that 'square' thing. (that was the whole point in including that chart....so that people can see that the Heb "tav" is not a "T" And the Grk "omega" is not a "T")

And....WHO CARES what Origen or Tertullian said??? Their writings are as meaningful as those of Luther and Calvin; or Benny Hinn, Rick Warren and Paul Crouch.

What does the -SCRIPTURE- say?

The Lord said to put a mark on those "who sigh and cry over all the abominations that are done within it." But the passage does not tell us it was a "T". That sort of suggestion is mere speculation by various authors with various agendas and axes to grind. People are soooo enamoured by paganism's symbols that they will "twist to their own destruction" (2Pe3:16) anything they can lay their hands on, in order to "excuse" their pagan lusts. They sooooo -WANT- those pagan symbols, that they will turn facts and history upside down and inside out, and then attach their convoluted conclusions to make the Scriptures say things, as a result, that God did not say. Ezk9:4 doesn't say it WAS a "T", nor does it say it was NOT. It, simply, does not say 'what' it was. To make any such assumption is to 'add' to God's Word something He did not include in the passage. And I don't care -how- historically 'famous' the scholar is who might pontificate on the matter....the Scripture DOES NOT SAY.... ...Period...

According to Revelation we also know the antichrist will require a "mark". But again, the Scriptures do not specify 'what' that mark is. We know there is a relationship to "666". But again, Scripture does not spell that out, either. Today we see Babylon's marks on the foreheads of both the cross (smudge), and round dots (India), and other such marks in various cultures. They are not all a "T". And with today's commerce technology many are speculating the mark is a sub-dermal 'chip' or scanable tattoo. Until the antichrist is "unveiled" (2Th2:3,6,8) and it comes to pass, any suggestion is mere conjecture.

Amen!

[Top]
Return to: Q/A's