Is the Cross a Pagan Idol?

We first wish to point out that there are many rituals and practices involving the cross that are indeed idolatrous and of an occult nature. It is usually because of these practices that many say the cross itself is an idol. We believe this to be an extreme view. Such a conclusion would mean that the sun itself is an idol because there are people who worship the sun as a god. Likewise, with the moon, the stars, the constellations, the zodiac, etc., all of which are presented in the Bible as being God's creation.

God's creations, as such, are not idols, but anything of God's creation can be used as an idol. It is the way such may be used that makes it an idol in its usage, not that the thing created is of itself an idol.

We need to note that a form of the cross is used throughout both the Old Testament and the New Testament in the form of a letter of both the Hebrew and Greek alphabet — usually referred to as "Tau" — both in Hebrew and Greek. If this shape is, of itself, an idol, then the Bible writers have been guilty of using this idol throughout the Bible.

The Greek word most often used in the Bible to describe the instrument upon which Jesus was put to death is often transliterated as "stauros" (Strong's #4716). The basic meaning of this word is an upright stake. However, the word came to be used in many ways, including that of an execution instrument used by the Romans in the first century, which often consisted, not just of an upright stake or pole, but of a stake, or pole, with a crossbeam, resembling a Tau shape.

However, the Tau cross was also a symbol of the Roman God Mithras and the Greek Attis, and their forerunner Tammuz, the Sumerian solar God, the consort of the Goddess Ishtar. In Latin, this symbol is called the "crux ommissa," and it is a variant of that which is usually called the "Christian cross", the crux ordinaria, believed by many to have been the actual shape of the instrument on which Jesus was hung.

. 

While the shape of the instrument of Christ's death is actually not that important, many believe that the shape of the instrument on which Jesus died was that of a Tau, the crux commissa. Obviously, the use of this symbol in idolatrous practices does not, however, make the symbol itself an idol. On the other hand, because the symbol has been, and even to this day, used in idolatry as well as occult practices, we believe one should be aware of this, and not contribute to such idolatrous practices. Likewise, we do not know for sure that the instrument of Christ's death did actually have a crossbeam, and there are those who argue that it did not, that it was simply an upright pole. We do know from first century documentation that the Romans did at times make use of a crossbeam on a stauros, so we know that the word stauros was used of such an instrument at the time that Jesus died.

John 20:25

The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." -- World English.

This verse is often cited as proof that Jesus died on a cross and not an upright stake without a crossbeam. Those who believe Jesus died on uncrossed stake usually depict Jesus on a stake with only one nail driven though both hands. The fact that nails is plural does indicate at least one nail driven through each hand. If Jesus died on the cross with his hands as usually shown upon such a cross, he surely would have needed at least one nail driven through each hand. This offers proof that he might have been put to death on a cross, but it is not conclusive, since more than one nail could have been used in his hands even if he died upon a stake without a crossbeam. It does prove that the illustrations of Jesus dying upon an upright stake with only one nail driven through both hands is in error, since Thomas spoke of the print of the nails (plural) in his hands.

References:

The Ancient Hebrew Alphabet - Tav

Tau Cross

Stauros

Entry for Strong's #4716

(We do not necessarily agree with all conclusions given by other authors)