Freethought & Rationalism Archive

avi · 11-27-2010, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

For a clear eta look at the letter after ανον.

Thanks, spin, yes, agreed.
That is, the fifth symbol of the fifth line, appears to be eta.

If you look at the very next symbol of that line, i.e. upsilon, it bears a striking resemblance to the second symbol of the word in question, on the preceding line. If one then examines the chi symbol, that is, the first symbol of the contested word, it could also be a lambda. Are there any Greek words that start with lambda upsilon, and terminate with anon?

(I don't have the answer, it is not some kind of trick question, I ask in ignorance, but, that symbol upsilon, the sixth symbol of line five, is pretty close in appearance, to what I see for the second symbol of the contested word at the end of line four.)

avi

stephan huller · 11-27-2010, 09:10 AM

What the hell does that mean? Once again we're back to the same question - how is the evidence spin brings forward best explained? The answer is that it can only be a reference to the arrest of someone associated with the Jesus cult. End of story. I have demonstrated in another thread that Clement used the terms interchangeably

spin · 11-27-2010, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

The point I was making is that the title 'Christian' is derivative, of the Greek language,
it did not arise in a vacuum and takes it meaning form other, preexisting forms of the Greek.
While you may choose to interpret the word in POxy_3035 as being the title 'Christian', the actual spelling appearing there does not correspond.

spin was already aware that it was "spelled wrong" otherwise he would not have bothered appending his ETA "well, it can't be 'christian' because it's spelled wrong."

I guess that's a "don't know" response.

spin · 11-27-2010, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

For a clear eta look at the letter after ανον.

Thanks, spin, yes, agreed.
That is, the fifth symbol of the fifth line, appears to be eta.

If you look at the very next symbol of that line, i.e. upsilon, it bears a striking resemblance to the second symbol of the word in question, on the preceding line. If one then examines the chi symbol, that is, the first symbol of the contested word, it could also be a lambda. Are there any Greek words that start with lambda upsilon, and terminate with anon?

Looks like a chi, not like any of the lambdas in the document.

spin

Sheshbazzar · 11-27-2010, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Incidentally, Shesh, while even the Codex Sinaiticus uses the form, who besides christians ever got called chrestians?
spin

There is some discussion of this to be found, as for example,
To who or what do Chrest and Chrestian refer early in the first century of this era? here.

and

Quote:

Christians or Chrestians?

The surviving copies of Tacitus' works derive from two principal manuscripts, known as the Medicean manuscripts, which are held in the Laurentian LibraryLaurentian LibraryThe Laurentian Library in Florence, Italy is famous as a repository of more than 11,000 manuscripts and 4,500 early printed books...
, and written in LatinLatinLatin is an Italic language originally spoken in Latium and Ancient Rome. Although often considered a dead language, in view of the fact that it has no native, fluent speakers, Latin continues to be taught in schools and has been, and currently is, used in the process of new word production in...
. It is the second Medicean manuscript which is the oldest surviving copy of the passage describing Christians. In this manuscript, the first 'i' of the Christianos is quite distinct in appearance from the second, looking somewhat smudged, and lacking the long tail of the second 'i'; additionally, there is a large gap between the first 'i' and the subsequent long sLong sThe long, medial or descending s is a form of the minuscule letter s formerly used where s occurred in the middle or at the beginning of a word, for example ſinfulneſs . The modern letterform was called the terminal or short s.-History:The long s is derived from the old Roman cursive medial s...
. Georg Andresen was one of the first to comment on the appearance of the first 'i' and subsequent gap, suggesting in 1902 that the text had been altered, and an 'e' had originally been in the text, rather than this 'i'.

In 1950, at Harald Fuchs request, Dr. Teresa Lodi, the director of the Laurentian Library, examined the features of this item of the manuscript; she concluded that there are still signs of an 'e' being erased, by removal of the upper and lower horizontal portions, and distortion of the remainder into an 'i'. In 2008, Dr. Ida Giovanna Rao, the new head of the Laurentian Library's manuscript office, repeated Lodi's study, and concluded that it is likely that the 'i' is a correction of some earlier character (like an e), the change being made an extremely subtle one. Later the same year, it was discovered that under ultraviolet light, an 'e' is clearly visible in the space, meaning that the passage must originally have referred to chrestianos, a Latinized Greek word which could be interpreted as the good, after the Greek word χρηστός (chrestos), meaning 'good, useful'. "I believe that in our passage of Tacitus the original reading Chrestianos is the true one" says Professor Robert Renehan, stating that it was "natural for a Roman to interpret the words [Christus and Christianus] as the similarly-sounding χρηστός".

from http://absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Tacitus_on_Jesus
As well as in many discussions regarding the term 'chrestian' that have appeared in various threads within these FRDB Forums.

spin · 11-27-2010, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Incidentally, Shesh, while even the Codex Sinaiticus uses the form, who besides christians ever got called chrestians?
spin

...

If you're going to say you don't know but here's some smoke and mirrors, you can forget the smoke and mirrors, naughty Shesh.

spin

stephan huller · 11-27-2010, 09:42 AM

Quote:

In The Statesman he says expressly, "So that the knowledge of the true king is kingly; and he who possesses it, whether a prince or private person, shall by all means, in consequence of this act, be rightly styled royal." Now those who have believed in Christ both are and are called Chrestoi, as those who are cared for by the true king are kingly.(Αὐτίκα οἱ εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν πεπιστευκότες χρηστοί τε εἰσὶ καὶ λέγονται, ὡς τῷ ὄντι βασιλικοὶ οἱ βασιλεῖ μεμελημένοι) [Paed 2.4]

Shesh, you obviously read the other thread. Otherwise where did you get the quote. It's over. There a half dozen other references which show the role of Chrestos in third century Egyptian Jesus cult.

Sheshbazzar · 11-27-2010, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

What the hell does that mean? Once again we're back to the same question - how is the evidence spin brings forward best explained? The answer is that it can only be a reference to the arrest of someone associated with the Jesus cult. End of story. I have demonstrated in another thread that Clement used the terms interchangeably

We were discussing the appearance of the word 'chrestian', and now based upon nothing at all contained within POxy_3035: you have leaped to the conclusion that it constitutes evidence for the existence of a full blown 'Jesus cult'.

You are free to jump to your conclusions, and 'End your Story' (for about the dozenth time now)
But I ain't buying your 'End of Story' unproven conclusions.

avi · 11-27-2010, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Looks like a chi, not like any of the lambdas in the document.

I agree with this, completely,
HOWEVER,
a. none of the four lambdas in lines 5 and 6 look, at least to my eye, like a conventional lambda, however:

b. The chi in κωμάρχαις, line 2, is so convincing, bold, and affirmative, quite distinct from the symbol in question in line 4, which has a TYPICAL, curving, lambda like front limb, (unlike the front limb of the Chi in line 2, which is absolutely straight), so, I inquire again, (in ignorance), are there any Greek words that commence with lambda upsilon?

avi

Sheshbazzar · 11-27-2010, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

In The Statesman he says expressly, "So that the knowledge of the true king is kingly; and he who possesses it, whether a prince or private person, shall by all means, in consequence of this act, be rightly styled royal." Now those who have believed in Christ both are and are called Chrestoi, as those who are cared for by the true king are kingly.(Αὐτίκα οἱ εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν πεπιστευκότες χρηστοί τε εἰσὶ καὶ λέγονται, ὡς τῷ ὄντι βασιλικοὶ οἱ βασιλεῖ μεμελημένοι) [Paed 2.4]

Shesh, you obviously read the other thread. Otherwise where did you get the quote. It's over. There a half dozen other references which show the role of Chrestos in third century Egyptian Jesus cult.

I have read and participated in 'the other thread'. And as usual you are misconstruing, confusing, and conflating my position with that of mountainman.
I have no objection to 'Chrestos' or 'Jesus Chrestos', or even 'Jesus ChrIstos' as being present in the 3rd century Egyptian, or Greek, -or post 276 CE -Manichean 'Jesus cult' writings. As that is within my own convictions.

My position is that there is no -contemporary- evidence of Mani himself ever employing these Christian terms in any document -conclusively- dated to before 276 CE, And that is simply a Fact.
I have asked you repeatedly to produce a pre-276 CE Mani manuscript. You have not.

That does not preclude my position that the remaining syncretising Manichaeans very quickly adopted and incorporated these extremely popular 3rd century Greek 'Christian' terms -after Mani's death- and well in advance of the alleged 'Nicene conspiracy'. Which I do not at all view as having been any 'conspiracy', outside of the well known deliberate attempt to expunge 'heretical' writings and any documents critical of, or presenting an unorthodox version the Christian Church's origins.

It is NOT over, and will not BE over, until you can produce a -contemporary- Mani document -conclusively- dated to before 276 CE containing your beloved Christian terms.

All of your assertions that 'It is over' remain baseless until this -contemporary- proof has been presented; Not simply your asserted Jump-to-conclusions, or convictions based upon the contents of post 276 CE Manichaean or Orthodox writings.

.

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

11-27-2010, 09:10 AM	#102
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	What the hell does that mean? Once again we're back to the same question - how is the evidence spin brings forward best explained? The answer is that it can only be a reference to the arrest of someone associated with the Jesus cult. End of story. I have demonstrated in another thread that Clement used the terms interchangeably

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.