Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 03-26-2008, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

I am here attempting to defend a prosecution of a case of imperial forgery

A prosecution has to begin with a showing of probable cause. I have seen no evidence that shows probable cause.

That is why I said I am here attempting to defend the prosecution case. It appears that there is noone who prepared to argue that the best explanation of the origins of christian literature is an imperial forgery (except Joe Atwill). So far I have seen no explanation or theory of christian origins which makes complete historical sense of the whole phenomenom of NT literature inclusive of the apocryphal writings, since mainstream is simply Eusebian conjecture as chronology, without any archaeological underpinnings whatsoever.

Quote:

To the contrary, you have argued that your indictment is a "postulate" and that, as such, it requires no evidence.

While this is true, this does not mean that I will not attempt to provide substantiating evidence. To be fair, the theory of the HJ has no evidence whatsoever either, and the remark about the postulate (of either the HJ or of FICTION) requiring no evidence, was simply to demonstrate that my position and the mainstream position are equally stationed in this respect, and are equally falsifiable by the evidence.

Best wishes

Pete Brown

mountainman · 03-26-2008, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Everywhere, or only in the regions being persecuted? Justin Martyr and Tertullian both wrote openly to the leaders of Rome. If Christianity was universally illegal and Christians universally persecuted, could they have gotten away with such an open profession of their beliefs?

Justin Martyr didn't get away with it , he was eventually executed for his faith.

Persecution was erratic but it probably happened occasionally in most places. (It would partly depend on the priorities of the Governor who would change every few years.). How far the (low) risk of being killed for being an open Christian deterred you would depend on the person. Most, one would expect, played safe.

Hi Andrew,

Such logic will not cut it in this thread since we are here viewing the literature of the polemicist Eusebius as fictional. I hate to be one to have to explain this to you, but the hypothesis being explored implies Justin Martyr and Bilbo Baggins are both fictional characters. Justin never lived to be executed. This thread considers the story was bullshit.

Do you at least understand this position?

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

mountainman · 03-26-2008, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I just noticed this story: Road workers find 1,000 ancient graves in Thessaloniki

Quote:

Workers digging a subway system in the Greek city of Thessaloniki have unearthed a treasure trove of graves containing jewellery, art and coinage,the Greek archaeological service has said.

Some 1,000 graves were uncovered with the greater share, 886, found east of the centre of the metropolis, at the site of a cemetery during Roman and Byzantine times.

The graves are dated from the first century BC to the 5th century CE.

Just the right time frame.

Quote:

I wonder how long it will take for archeologists to analyze the finds.

There's nothing quite like looking forward to the future of the past. I wonder how the Religious Management of the site will be coordinated this time around? Expect the Vatican to make serious moves on this one.

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

Toto · 03-26-2008, 07:11 PM

The Vatican does not have a lot of influence in Greece, and the Greek church is not in charge of this dig. The Greeks are much more concerned about their classical heritage and Philip the Great than about the exact dates for Christianity.

Sheshbazzar · 03-26-2008, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

I am not going to provide the citations for all these hundreds of lying fictions that were penned by "Christian" hands,

But I didn't ask for hundreds.

Quote:

they were written, and they will ever remain as permanent witnesses against the integrity of the Christian Fathers, and of the Christian religion.

In other words, you don't know where they are. Thanks for confirming what I suspected to be the case.

Jeffrey

Anyone who has any further interest in the subject of the Christian Martyrs and the fabrications of their martyrdom stories, may simply check out the article "Christian Martyrs" that is readily available on Wikipedia, with its myriad links to additional information.

Here is a short excerpt from The Catholic Encyclopedia article "Acts of the Martyrs"

Quote:

Still these two classes of romantic Acta can hardly be regarded as forgeries in the strict sense of that term. They are literary figments, but as they were written with the intention of edifying and not deceiving the reader, a special class must be reserved for hagiographical forgeries. To this must be relegated all those Acts, Passions, Lives, Legends, and Translations which have been written with the EXPRESS PURPOSE OF PERVERTING HISTORY, such, for instance, as the legends and translations falsely attaching a saint's name to some special church or city. Their authors disgraced the name of hagiographer, and they would not merit mention were it not that conscious deceit has in consequence been attributed to those hagiographers, who, having for their object to edify and not to instruct, have written Acta which were meant to be read as romances and not as history.

( bold empathises mine)

The tons of evidence which supports my former statement is readily available to anyone.
And while I could easily supply many individual examples of these fabricated martyrdom stories, I refuse to play that "game" that Jeffrey attempts to set up in thread after thread by making continual demands for additional documentation, and then being insulting and condescending to anyone who will not comply with his unneeded and childishly incessant demands.

This diversionary debating tactic is very transparent Jeffrey, and when it is used monotonously in post after post it really becomes feeble, and is not a bait that many of us are going to rise to anymore.
If you find a statement to be not to your liking, why not make some actual effort to refute its premise, rather than that dragging out that old and lame-o tactic of a one liner documentation demand?
If you can't refute a statement, or are just plain to lazy to take the time, thought, or effort involved, you would do much better to just ignore it, rather than always fishing with that same old, overused, dried out, and shriveled up worm. It just makes you look too stupid to know any better.

spamandham · 03-26-2008, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Why do you keep implying that Christianity was a small, illegal sect prior to Constantine?

I already did (ie Pliny and Tacitus).

Pliny and Tacitus both wrote >200 years before Constantine. Is you position that nothing changed regarding Christianity from the time they wrote until Constantine? If not, then I don't understand the point of bringing them up.

We're discussing the entire pre-Nicean Christian era, not just it's origins.

spamandham · 03-26-2008, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Justin Martyr didn't get away with it , he was eventually executed for his faith.

We actually don't know that, it's merely church tradition. But regardless, his writings do not give the impression he felt his life in jeopardy for being vocal.

Amaleq13 · 03-26-2008, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Is you position that nothing changed regarding Christianity from the time they wrote until Constantine?

Isn't Constantine known for bringing persecution of Christians to an end?

mountainman · 03-26-2008, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Is you position that nothing changed regarding Christianity from the time they wrote until Constantine?

Isn't Constantine known for bringing persecution of Christians to an end?

This is only what Constantine's expressly published imperial propaganda, and its associated Eusebian rhetoric, is intended to have us believe. He is equally renown by the pagans for the commencement of christian hostilities against their traditions and culture, against the preservation of their literature, and art, and temples, and sculpture and artefacts, etc. See Vlasis Rassias

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

MarkA · 03-27-2008, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkA

Small groups of prehistoric hunter gathers and proto farmers have left this sort of evidence that has
survived thousands of years.

Do you imagine the evidence to be representative of every small group of hunters or proto-farmers? Our discoveries and just a small portion of the total number of folks alive around at the time. It is only because there were enough people leaving enough evidence that some of it has managed to survive. It is a simple fact that we have lost far more than we have found. It is simply not reasonable to expect that every small group of hunters or proto-farmers to leave such evidence nor is it reasonable to draw any conclusion from the absence of such evidence.

I must have missed the post where you offered examples. What illegal or persecuted minority religious groups have left behind "hard archaeological evidence" of their existence during the time they were persecuted?

Their families would not be.

I'm not saying you would not, I'm saying it is naive to assume that you would. If we didn't have texts informing us that early Christians used a fish symbol to identify themselves to each other, how would you know the symbol was significant? Even with that information, we still don't know exactly why or how that symbol was derived.

Quote:

Were there different symbols in use before the fourth century and what evidence have you for that?

I don't recall who tells us about the use of the fish symbol but I see no reason to assume that this was the only non-obvious symbol used by Christians.

I can see this being an interminable argument with no resolution in sight.

But let me make a few points.

One: there is no evidence either textual or archaeological or traditional that there were any secret symbols used by christians to identify themselves to one another at any time or in any place. This sort of deux ex machina must be left out of the debate.

Two: the ONLY symbolism that is attested by ANY christian apologist is found ONLY from the fourth century onwards. This needs to be explained.

Three: writings alone no matter from waht source that claim to give an explanation of events need to be verified by archaeology if possible.

As Toto posted previously he found a reference to pre-Nicene amulets somewhere. If he can recall where he saw this it would invaluable in having some hard evidence to evaluate. There is also that graffiti of the ass headed man on a cross that should have its date verified.

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

03-26-2008, 07:11 PM	#254
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The Vatican does not have a lot of influence in Greece, and the Greek church is not in charge of this dig. The Greeks are much more concerned about their classical heritage and Philip the Great than about the exact dates for Christianity.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.