figuer

You could have avoided writing everything above the bold, since it lacks any relevance to my objection to your thesis. Concerning the bold, it is very unconvincing that Christians could have eliminated any knowledge the Jews would have desired to preserve, specially since not all Jewish communities resided under Christian rule. Eliminating the preservation and transmission of Jewish knowledge, which always contained criticisms of Christianity, would have required the elimination itself of Jews. Which was tried, but never achieved.

Huon

The title of the OP and the title of the poll are different.
OP : Has mountainman's theory re Constantine's invention of christianity been falsified?
Poll : Has mountainman's theory been falsified by the Dura evidence?

It is possible that mountainman's theory (Constantine's invention of christianity) is also falsified by other evidences.

If christianity did not exist before Constantine, then, the Milvian Bridge battle won in 312 by Constantine against Maxentius is a splendid miracle offered by the Christian god to Constantine, to convert him from the religion of Sol Invictus to the religion of Christ.

If an historian does not believe in miracles, then, the Milvian Bridge battle won in 312 by Constantine against Maxentius is the result of two ordinary events :
1 - a politico-military alliance between Constantine and the christian party, an important minority,
2 - the very bad policies of Maxentius, which caused the treason of an important fraction of his army, and the rout of his partisans.

Sheshbazzar

The pen-name "Paul" was used to fabricate and introduce an antinomian ("no-Law") form of religious doctrine, set to the opposing, undermining, and subverting of all the traditional beliefs and practices of the Jews religion.
This gentile fabricated "Paul" was a devious and sly bastard, one who is claimed to keep The Law and to walk orderly, (Acts 21:21-26) while "his" (sic) writings and doctrines opposed and attempted to void The Law.
The term "christ" was around, and was used in The LXX long before the claimed birth and earthly life of the fabricated NT character.
The Gentile's had easy access to this form of "Scripture", and employed it (rather, abused it) in the fabrication of their own distinctive theology and religion.
This began a long before the time the so-called "Christ" figure is alleged to have been born in Bethlehem.
A little effort at thought, and you would not need to engage in this game of endless questions.
That answer ought to be self-evident in view of all my previous posts in this thread. My "historical answer to the question of how Christianity originated" being that all of its stories, its claims, and "theology" were all made-up and fabricated by pagan gentiles over the course of several centuries, beginning well before the time the "events" related in christian texts supposedly took place.

Why should it only now "appear"? I have previously and clearly stated that I do not accept Pete's particular theory and answer, that being of a complete Constantinian fabrication of all of the Christian texts and religion.
I have argued at length here that these old fabricated stories and documents were already around and only edited and adapted by Constantine to his political agenda and advantage.

J-D

It is not evident to me when, where, how, and why you think this began.

avi

Apart from Josephus' books, for which there is at least some claim of editorial interference by subsequent generations, which authors (Jewish or otherwise) can you recommend for documenting the turbulent events of the first five hundred years of the "common era"? How about the PRECEDING five hundred years? Which Jewish authors, living about the time of Aristotle, plus or minus 200 years, document the extent to which the Babylonian captivity, with concomitant exposure to Zoroastrianism, caused fundamental changes to the practice of Judaism?

To illustrate the point, that recorded history is fragile, consider Abraham Lincoln, a man much admired throughout the world, with statues erected in his honor in many countries. Yet, if one asks a person, in France, or China, or Argentina, WHY is Lincoln revered, the response may be disconcerting...Invariably one hears, or one reads, "Lincoln freed the slaves". Did he? We are living only 150 years after Lincoln, but how many people realize that Lincoln DID NOT free the slaves, except, in the Confederate South, a region over which Lincoln had no authority, but when ASKED to free the slaves in the North of the USA, where Lincoln DID have authority, HE REFUSED. Why? In his home state of Illinois, his financial backers were wealthy landowners, who depended upon slavery. That is why Lincoln refused to free the slaves in the Northern half of the USA. It was the Congress of the USA, not Lincoln, who freed the slaves in the North.

So, this is an illustration of HOW DISTORTED history can be, even though we are living in an era with much better access to recording "facts", and documenting banalities and massacres alike, by means of photographs (which we employed 150 years ago), yet, even with far superior techniques, we still cannot produce an accurate history, nor a population properly educated. How can we then expect an honest presentation of events so remote in time, with media so readily tampered with, and so unreliable in accuracy? Even if there were a Jewish author to document Constantine's activities, how likely is it that he/she could procure the writing materials needed to express his/her opinion? Were those materials locked up to ensure that only authorized individuals could transmit information? How do we know that Jewish authors DID NOT write about Constantine, and that subsequent political regimes ordered the destruction of all such materials, just as Constantine ordered destruction of materials he found objectionable?

Probably SOMEONE else, besides me, knows about Lincoln, but, good luck finding a school textbook with the truth embedded within. I do not accept the premise of your submission, and I sincerely hope that I err, and that some Jewish authors can be found, writing during that era, discussing many other subjects, but not the life of Jesus, oops, oh, yes, that's right, I almost forgot, THERE ARE NO JEWISH authors, living at the time of Jesus' purported birth, death, or subsequent decades, writing about Jesus either. It is not just Constantine for whom we have a paucity of information from Jewish authors....

Sheshbazzar

Oh, come on! What did I just write?

Sheshbazzar

Oh, come on! What did I just write?

Huon

Thank you for this precision. There are many "false friends" in english, for french speakers. I could have written "refuted", which has strictly the same meaning in french and in english. I used "falsified", as it was mentioned in the title of the OP.

bacht

Are there any references in the Talmuds, open or cryptic? One would think that the Mesopotamian community would have said something about such a development, even if the western Jews felt too intimidated to comment.

spin

Gooood question. Let's see if you get a response.


spin