mountainman

Let's go through the elements of scene again, as described in the caption:

Central figures: "The Teacher of the Law", "Orante" and "The Good Shephers".

(1) The teacher of the law who reads from an open scroll is not a christian motif
and there is no attempt to describe this figure as a "christian".

(2) The "Orante" is certainly not a christian motif. The term Orante refers to
"a standing female figure with arms stretched above her head." The author
states the following about the "Orante" ....

(a) "In the Christian culture that emerged about 180 CE, no symbol
occurs more frequently and integrally that this female figure with
lifted arms."

(b) "She must be the most important symbol in early Christian art."

(c) "Since the Orante has no integral meaning in most biblical,
pictorial art, (except Susannah), one must conclude that the
Orante symbol has been inserted into biblical scenes."

The Orante occurred as the obverse of coins struck from the time
of Trajan to the time of Maximian. That is between 98 CE to 310 CE.
The immediate implication of this is that the Orante symbol cannot
possibly be considered as an exemplar of "Christian Symbology"

Other articles on the "Orante" suggest that the female symbol is most
ancient and relared to the mother goddess through whom all life emerges.
Here is a good background reference to the central figure of the "Orante" ...

THE ORANTE AND THE GODDESS IN THE ROMAN CATACOMBS - Valerie Abrahamsen



(3) "The Good Shepherd" is also certainly NOT a Christian symbol.

"Andre Parrot has traced the Near Eastern use of the Good Shepherd
also known as the ("criophorus") as far backs as 1000 BCE."

NOTE: The Good Shepherd carries a horned animal, not a sheep.



The author writes ...

(a)"Klauser supposes the Good Shepherd ("criophorus") to be derived from Hermes, the humanitarian god. So as the Orantes referred to pietas, the Good Shepherd pointed to philanthropia.... The connection to Hermes seems likely ...

(b) "The early Christians pulled these two powerful symbols from their Roman social matrix".

One may alternatively deduce that these three central figures are non christian motifs.

Let's move on to the rest of the scene ....


LEFT SIDE: (from the caption)

"Continuing left is a Jonah cycle, first Jonah resting, then Jonah cast
out of the ketos, and finally Jonah in the boat. To the extreme left
side stands a river god."

The identification of "Jonah" and a "Jonah cycle" is haphazard since
there is absolutely nothing in the scene to support this assertion.
The "Ketos" is a non biblical sea monster, and the figure might just
as well be indentified with the legend of Hercules, whom the Roman
Emperors (up until Diocletian) variously patronised.

The river god at the extreme left is another very strong indication
that the motif is non christian.

RIGHT SIDE (from the caption)

"To the right of the Good Shepherd there is a baptism of Jesus with a dove
descending. Jesus is young, nude, and quite small next to the older, bearded
John the Baptist. A pastoral scene concludes the right end"

The identification of Jesus as the small young nude child being baptised
by the older bearded John the Baptist is exceedingly rediculous. The biblical
account does not narrate anything about the childhood of Jesus (of course
some of the "Infancy Gnostic Gospels and Acts" do make such mention) but it
is generally accepted that Jesus, if he was baptised by John, was not a child
at the time. I cannot see any dove descending upon the young nude child who
is being misconstrued as Jesus. Finally the pastoral scene is hardly
symbolic of christianity, and in fact is far more suggestive of "Pagan"
(ie: country) motifs.

SUMMARY:


Looking back across the above analysis of the scene there appears to be absolutely
nothing compelling the objective skeptic from concluding that the evidence being
presented as "Christian" is in fact totally unconvincing. The scene is full of
motifs from the Graeco-Roman social matrix, which dominated Rome and the Roman
empire until the beginning of the fourth century.



Further Background Information

It may be expedient to cite the author Graydon Snyder and thereby disclose
that the bulk of all these citations stem from the mid 19th century, and the
Papal sponsored archaeologist de Rossi.

"The real founders of the science of early Christian archaeology came in the 19th century: Giuseppe Marchi (1795 - 1860) and
Giovanni de Rossi (1822 - 1894) .... it was de Rossi who published
the first great mass of data.... Between 1857 and 1861 he published
the first volume of Inscriptiones christianae urbis Romae.

Pope Pius IX moved beyond collecting by appointing in 1852 a commission
(Commissione de archaelogia sacra) that would be responsible for
all early Christian remains."

Why should we trust these popes as "authorities" of any kind?

The evidence presented in "ante pacem" appears to be "Holy Grail material".

mountainman

Private collection? It's for sale!
How is this being dated before Constantine?

Was the ring an asset or a liability?
If it was around ante pacem it would be a liability.
If it was around after Constantine, it would have been a powerful asset.
Which is the more likely?

How is this item of "evidence" dated other than by salespeople?

mountainman

Hi Philosopher Jay,

Perhaps the appropriate word is Apophenia?

It would appear that Pre-Constantinian New Testament Archaeology is a Pseudo-Science.

Despite the standard Christian Apophenia "The Good Shepherd" is NOT a Christian symbol. "Andre Parrot has traced the Near Eastern use of the Good Shepherd also known as the ("criophorus") as far back as 1000 BCE." The Good Shepherd carries a horned animal, not a sheep. Probably relates to Hermes.

Despite the standard Christian Apophenia "The Fish" is just a fish.

What we are missing in examining this evidence is the fact that much of it has been catalogued by the Papal archaeologist de Rossi in the mid 19th century, and nobody has seriously given it a second look with the view that de Rossi and his Papal sponsor were suffering from the standard Christian Apophenia in viewing the ancient historical evidence of "christian origins".

This is the year 2010 and we can see "evidence" that the universe is billions of years old, yet we cannot see "evidence" for the Historical Jesus "ante pacem". Neither do I see evidence for the "Gnostic Gospels and Acts, etc" "ante pacem". I dont mean to try and discredit Graydon Snyder and all people who have managed to convince themselves that there is evidence of christian origins before the peace of Constantine, its just that I dont see that evidence as anywere even remotely near convincing.

mountainman