# A reinterpretation of symbols **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 2, 2001, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609 "2001-08-02T06:07:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2001, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/21 "2001-08-03T19:35:13Z")
**delphica** , to be completely honest, I don’t know what the debate is exactly either. I started it as one thing, but the more discussion we’ve had, the more the ideas have shifted and that’s fine with me. Basically, I wanted to see what it takes to change the meaning of a symbol. Religious, social, whatever. And whoever has the symbol and uses the symbol obviously doesn’t think that they’re doing it for “evil” purposes, just for their own purposes. Hitler and the swastika, for one example. The confederate flag for another. Most people know what it symbolizes and they consider it to be a bad thing. But there are those few out there who see it as a legitimate symbol of their historical past. But the idea of what the confederate flag symbolizes has changed over time, which is why it’s being yanked off state flags right and left. The black and pink triangle were used by Hitler? Interesting, I didn’t know that. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2001, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/22 "2001-08-03T19:36:45Z")
> [@](#): > > I do vaguely remember a character in Petronius’s Satyricon saying something like “may I be crucified if…” Indeed. > [@](#): > > nec hoc dii sinant ut amplexus meos in crucem mittam Sat. CXXVI Cross symbolism is a relatively grave subject which I don’t quite feel comfortable enough to wade into. Those who are further interested should read the Dream of the Rood, a medieval Anglo-Saxon poem in which the narrator relates a vision he saw of the True Cross. It is, to say the least, fascinating. Even riveting, pun intended. You may find it in Anglo-Saxon [here](http://www.georgetown.edu/labyrinth/library/oe/texts/a2.5.html), or a version in modern English verse [here](http://www.georgetown.edu/cball/oe/rood-trans.html). I would translate it for the boards myself, but Killings’ verse is better than anything I could come up with. It’s only 155 lines, and really worth the time of anyone who is interested in these matters. MR ---
**Author:** ![deb2world](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7cd45c/32.png) [@deb2world](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deb2world)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2001, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/23 "2001-08-03T23:28:19Z")
**Snickers** I am sorry we hurt you. Yes I am a practicing Seventh Day Adventist. Do you remember learning about the shaking, what this means is that right now not all people in church are there because they love Christ. They are there because they love the status that being a Christian gives them. > [@](#): > > But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn. Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. Matthew 13:25-40 > [@](#): > > Many will say to me that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I process unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Matthew 7:21-22 This means that these people are left in the church for now so that those who love Christ are not accidentally removed (chased) from the church through the controvesy that removing these hypocrites would cause. I am not talking about just Adventist but all Christian churches. Surely you met some good people who acted as Christ wants us to act. (you know, love thy neighbor as thyself). What it seems you were doing was concentrating on the tares or in other words those who are just warming a pew rather than concentrating on Christ which is the real reason to be in Church. It also seems that the members of the church you attended did not take the time to make sure that you felt welcomed and loved. I wish you could attend the congregations I have been to. It is what the Adventists call a celebration church. Our emphasis is on praising Christ. They are a loving group. Sabbath is not for sleeping but rather as a day to do the work of Jesus. We have groups that visit rest homes, groups that visit the sick, groups that pray, actually Sabbath hours are alot of times very busy. We also give food and clothing to the needy every Wednesday (alternating between food one Wed and clothing the next). Now don’t get me wrong, are we perfect, no. Are we trying to live a Christian life, yes. As to the op, The reason there is only a cross is to emphasize Christ’s resurrection. Sure He died on the cross but if it had ended there he would have just been another one of the multitude to have died in that manner, but it doesn’t end there. He rose from the dead. What I think we as modern man miss is just how horrific this death was. The lengths that our Lord went to for us is something that I, in my comfortable environment has a hard time comprehending. ---
**Author:** ![Dijon\_Warlock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a9a28c/32.png) [@Dijon\_Warlock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dijon_Warlock)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2001, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/24 "2001-08-04T03:42:20Z")
Just as a reference for the symbol discussion: [http://www.symbols.com/](http://www.symbols.com/) Carry on. ---
**Author:** ![BurnMeUp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@BurnMeUp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BurnMeUp)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/25 "2001-08-13T20:18:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by cuautemhoc \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by sqweels \* > > \*\* > > The original meaning of the swastika has nothing to do with Nazis. A number of ancient cultures, including American Indians, used the swastika as a symbol of good luck, etc. Hitler co-opted it, it’s now widely seen as a symbol of the Holocaust, and people are attacked if they try to use the symbol in it’s _original_ meaning. \*\* > > Yes. I think it’s a shame that the nazis ruined this perfectly good symbol. Maybe someday it’s original meaning can be reclaimed. > > I don’t know that people are _always_ attacked for trying to use the swastika to convey its original meaning. I thought I read somewhere that it had religious significance in India. \*\* The swastika is widely used in india by both buddhists and hindus. When i was traveling through india the swastika was painted on houses… walls, temples… you name it. I forget it’s exact meaning. Also the Nazi swastika isn’t the same as one has it’s “spokes” (for lack of a better term) going clockwise and the other, counter clockwise. If you live in any city with Hindu or Buddhist temples ask too look around (or sometimes in museums) many sculptures made before WWII will contain a swastiKa (and many to this day will still be made with it. [a href=http://members.nbci.com/Ciarin/swastika.htm]Here is an excellent link about the swastika.[/a] ---
**Author:** ![south333](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5f9b8f/32.png) [@south333](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/south333)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/26 "2001-08-13T22:12:24Z")
The biggest reason IMHO, that the cross was changed from a symbol of a relatively bad thing into a symbol of a good thing is that there was something really good that happened involving the cross to change its image. If Christ hadn’t died on the cross and then risen 3 days later, I highly doubt that people would be wearing the symbol around their necks or displaying them in their homes etc. The swastika on the other hand, was changed from a good thing (luck) to a bad thing (a symbol of nazism). I personally believe that the only way that a lot of people will accept the swastika (in the western part of the world anyway) is if something is if something really good happens, and the sastika is a symbol/involved in some way with that good thing. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/27 "2001-08-13T23:25:54Z")
Kimstu > [@](#): > > I believe some of that negative sense is still retained in our “crux” (Lat. “cross”, “torture”), meaning a crisis, a point of agonizing or desperate significance. IMO, it probably has more to do with the metaphor of a nexus or crossing: the crux of an issue is where all the strands of the issue meet, just as four beams meet at the center of a cross. south333 > [@](#): > > If Christ hadn’t died on the cross and then risen 3 days later, I highly doubt that people would be wearing the symbol around their necks or displaying them in their homes etc. Considering that there isn’t any substantial evidence that that happened, I don’t think that your assumption is valid. ---
**Author:** ![south333](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5f9b8f/32.png) [@south333](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/south333)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/28 "2001-08-14T01:38:01Z")
**The Ryan** - My assumption is not so much based on fact, but based on the beliefs of many people around the world and what was written in the new testament. I am **NOT** saying that it is fact, it is hearsay. The point that I was trying to make is that many Christians wear the cross to symbolize the crucifixion and the resurrection. Until this instance, the cross was a way that the Romans executed people (and they still did after Jesus was executed). OTOH, there are far more people who think of the swastika as the nazi symbol instead of a symbol of luck etc. THAT IMHO, is why more people seem to have a problem with the swastika than with the cross. That was the point I was trying to make in my first post. I appologize if I was unclear. ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/29 "2001-08-14T03:45:37Z")
**south333** , I think that’s a really good answer to my question. **BurnMeUp** thank you for the link, it was indeed informative. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/30 "2001-08-14T05:34:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Enderw24 \* > \*\*So then a symbols can and do change. Hitler said “no, I don’t think this is what the swastika means, here’s what _I_ think it should be,” and world perception switched with him. Then it’s possible to switch it back again. Maybe not now, but sometime. > \*\* Why not now? For me, the swastika has almost entirely positive connotations, because there is a very strong Asian influence where I live. In the most practical sense, a swastika posted outside a restaurant or on a package means “Suitable for Vegetarians.” Half of the products in my cupboards have swastikas on them, because there are two markets for vegetarian food: The hippie demographic, where the quality is low and the price is high, and the Buddhist demographic, where the reverse is true. I live in Vancouver, Canada. Regarding the original post, it’s interesting to trace the iconography of the cross. It was not originally a symbol of the crucifixion at all. (In fact, the Romans didn’t employ a cross-bar but used a single pole.) The evolution of the letter X is very interesting: The Phoenicians used used a graph which resembled a T with 3 horizontal lines, called _samekh_ which means **fish**. The greeks adapted the Phoenician alphabet to their own usage, and samekh morphed into Chi (which we would recognize as an X) over time. The Estrucans adapted the greek alphabet to suit _their_ language, rendering it “cursively” with one side closed: \<\>\< The Romans copied THAT, but since they preferred angularity, it became simply X again. There is a phonetic connection, and often an idiogrammatical connection to the concept “fish”. As Christianity spread, these were all used as christian symbols. The symbol of a cross is relatively new. Lenny Bruce pointed out (pretty astutely) that it seems pretty likely that in the event of a Second Coming, probably the LAST thing that Jesus would want to see would be crosses plastered everywhere. (And also that if Christ showed up in modern times, his future followers would probably have little electric-chair pendants. Why not?) ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609/31 "2001-08-14T11:06:35Z")
You mentioned that most people don’t wear a crucifix, but just a cross, **Ender**. This is generally true of Protestants; Catholics frequently do use the crucifix as a symbol of their beliefs, in jewelry and elsewhere. Although the historical reasons for Protestants prefering the empty cross probably has more to do with a reluctance to display images of God, the interpretation I have most often heard from Protestants themselves is that the emptiness of the cross makes it clear that Jesus is no longer hanging there, but is risen and has ascended into heaven. IOW, the cross is at least as much a symbol of the resurection as it is of the passion (suffering). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-reinterpretation-of-symbols/74609.md?page=1)