Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 10-02-2011, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I think the OP was a little tongue in cheek. The significance of this is not to show that there were Valentinians in Rome in the second century, but to emphasize that the earliest inscriptions considered to be Christian are Valentian, not proto-orthodox.

The so-called Valentinian Gnostics are well represented in the Nag Hammadi Codices of the mid 4th century. Another question to be asked would be how pagan were these Valentinians? When answering this question, Philosopher Jay has already pointed out the problem of Eusebius, and the assessment of the integrity of the information supplied by the heresiologists about their sworn and bitter enemies - the Gnostics.

Quote:

There are all sorts of excuses for the lack of Christian remains from the first and second centuries - but if the heretics could leave inscriptions, why not the orthodox?

The obvious answer is that perhaps the orthodox did not yet then exist.

Quote:

Of course, if this inscription is not really Valentinian, it's back to square one.

Eusebius and transcendentalism?

youngalexander · 10-02-2011, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

A more recent treatment by Lampe is in From Paul to Valentinus: Christians at Rome in the first two centuries (or via: amazon.co.uk) By Peter Lampe, Marshall D. Johnson (2003), the inscription's interpretive history is described starting on page 300. This is part of a chapter "[Are Valentinians] Members of 'Socially Priviliged Classes'[?]"

Pg307
In conclusion, the epigraph was a Valentinian inscription at the Via Latina. ...it was displayed in a suburban house where Valentinians celebrated sacremental rituals.

As the only 2ndC Xian inscription, it does not add anything to the probability of Orthodox Xian existence, except to emphasise that there is no archeological evidence of Orthodoxy prior to the 3rdC.

mountainman · 10-02-2011, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngalexander

As the only 2ndC Xian inscription, it does not add anything to the probability of Orthodox Xian existence, except to emphasise that there is no archeological evidence of Orthodoxy prior to the 3rdC.

And when we turn our attention to the inscriptions of the 3rd century, precisely what do we find? More utter ambiguous handwaving including such ludicrous assertions that the epigraphic phrase "HE SLEEPS" is the signature of a Christian presence.....

Quote:

INDEX of cited "Early Christian" Inscriptions

01 253 CE - de Rossi's Cornelius Stone [Probable forgery].
02 250 CE - The Marcus son of Alexander inscription. ["I beg of you, kind brothers, by the one God"]
03 217 CE - the Marcus Aurelius Prosenes inscription. [Later hand: "welcomed before god"]
04 250 CE - Basilides Inscription, Ostia, Rome [The phrase "he sleeps" is christian?]
05 3rd CE - "Helix" athlete, Eumenia. [not located]
06 3rd CE - Nicomedia, Bithnya: 3rd CE Phoenician wood carver. [not located]
07 3rd CE - Aurelius Aristeas Inscription, Akmonein. ["reckon with the righteousness of God."]
08 1st CE - Erastus Inscription, mid first century. ["Paul mentions an Erastus"]
09 3rd CE - Fox; Harland; Snyder - Asia Minor and Phrygia ["he will reckon with (the living) God." ].
10 200 CE - The Marcus Demetrianos Inscription ["most holy ones who also had faith in God"].
11 216 CE - Inscription of Abercius [Cannot be unambiguously associated with christianity]
12 253 CE - Inscription of Pectorius. [Cannot be unambiguously associated with christianity]
13 079 CE - Christian Inscription of Pompeii. [Lost; Cannot be unambiguously associated with christianity]

Early Christian Epigraphic Habit

This index represents further scientific evidence of the Jesus Myth. Each of these inscriptions have associated with them pagan elements. In the euphoric rush of working for the Vatican in the 19th century archaeologists who first compiled this list like de Rossi were not objective enough (if we exclude his known forgeries), and pandered to anything they could dress up in Christian tinsel and fairy dust.

youngalexander · 10-02-2011, 11:57 PM

MM and furthermore so there!

mountainman · 10-03-2011, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngalexander

MM and furthermore so there!

Thanks YA.

Summer soon.

Quote:

To my bath, the brothers of the bridal chamber carry the torches,
[here] in our halls, they hunger for the [true] banquets,
even while praising the Father and glorifying the Son.
There [with the Father and the Son] is the only spring and source of truth.

So the Graeco-Roman pagans were not associated in any way with baths?
They did not have brothers or marraiges or torches.
They did not have halls or banquets.
Neither did they have Fathers or Sons.

Now I see the reason that this inscription must be christian.
It's all so simple now. Why did I miss this earlier?

Quote:

Details on the provenance of the inscription are sketchy. It was first published in 1953 by Luigi Moretti in the "Bullettino della commissione archeologica comunale di Roma," an Italian archaeological journal published annually.

The only reference to where it was found is a note scribbled on a squeeze (a paper impression) of the inscription, Snyder said. According to that note, it was found in the suburbs of Rome near Tor Fiscale, a medieval tower. In ancient times, the location of the tower would have been near mile four of a roadway called the Via Latina.

How was it dated?

Margherita Guarducci, a well-known Italian epigrapher who passed away in 1999, proposed a second-century date for the inscription more than four decades ago.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-02-2011, 11:57 PM	#54
youngalexander Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Mornington Peninsula Posts: 1,306	MM and furthermore so there!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.