mountainman

Here are references to a dozen or more papyri
in which dinner invitations are recorded for
non-christians.

Did pre-nicene christians get invited to dinner by
written papyri, or was it too dangerous for these
prenicene christians to write to each other over
dinner?

Has anyone stumbled over any christian papyri
which are NOT dated paleographically, but by
other means -- such as the date written on the
fragment by the author, or other similar mechanism.


From a dissertation:

AN ANALYSIS OF CERTAIN FEATURES OF DISCOURSE
IN THE NEW TESTAMENT BOOK OF I CORINTHIANS

Doug Shaver

If they didn't do it, a more likely reason was that it was too expensive.

Julian

There were many grades of papyrus, some quite cheap. One kind was even used just to wrap merchandise. Many of the Oxy. fragments are notes much like what we would write today. More on papyrus here: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin...=head%3D%23814

Julian

mountainman

Many apologetic and in some cases non-apologetic authors
of ancient history (and "Biblical History") quote the gravestone
of Marcus Aurelius Prosenes as "evidence of a christian grave".

The reasoning used to do this is something like:

Although nothing in the original inscription suggests Christian
identity, one freedman named Ampelius later inscribed on the
stone the fact that Prosenes was

"welcomed before God"
(receptus ad deum)
on March 3, 217,
an expression which may best
be explained in terms of Christianity.
(cf. Mazzoleni 1999: 153).

Now we know that Marcus Aurelius Prosenes was in fact
the manager of the Imperial Gladatorial Games in Rome,
under Commodus, and would have been paid well.

Marcus Aurelius Prosenes would not have found
it too expensive to invite people over for din din,
perhaps after the Gladiatorial Games ended in
the evening.

Best wishes,



Pete Brown

Doug Shaver

OK. Thanks

mountainman

If we to generalise this question to include
categories of written communication between
extant dwellers of the "period of interest" in
antiquity, a rather large project would be
framed.

The project would then cover a list of all things
which had been discussed in the available papyri,
the acts of writing dinner invitations being only
one amidst many.

What I want to know is why we do not have
in our possession -- after this research ---
any unambigous "christian presence".

Not only are christians missing off the available
lists of dinner invitations in antiquity, the "nation"
(-- as described by its undoubtedly authoritative
fourth century historiographer, Eusebius --)
is not identifiable on any other list .... wait for it ..


of your choosing.


Where does this leave us in the fullness of time?

Another layer of conjectures, to expain the signature
of the absence of "our expectations" in the archaeology
of common "lists".

Eusebius tells us "early christians" were fond of writing
about "church heresies", and other subjects, which of
course would be on the list of things "discussed". But
we would have Eusebius' name beside these entries.

To be diligent in this before mainstream eyes the project
must include the subject matter of NT papyri, and their
dating and importantly -- their method of dating.

The category in the list of all things communicated in
writing preserved will thus include, along with "dinner
invitations", another category called "NT literature".

Enthusiasts can sub-categorise this to their heart's
desire, but must understand it is one item on a list
of items, such as "dinner lists", in the overall project.

Does anyone get the drift?

Best wishes,


Pete Brown