Sheshbazzar

I also attribute the origins and contents of The Dead Sea Scrolls to the Hebrew Bible (with the caveat that the Qumran community accepted and employed as Holy "Scripture" books that were not subsequently accepted by, or included in either the Jewish or Christian cannons.)
I believe that this rise of Jewish messianic expectations had its roots firmly founded within the messianic prophecies found within the Tanaka, and the uninfluenced Jewish interpretations of their own texts, as indicated within many ancient Jewish targums and commentaries.
I did not imply any NT influence upon the contents of the DSS, rather that the DSS most definitely were an influence upon the NT writings.

If "plaguerised" from such source, then the antecedent being so "plaguerised" was an authentic original messianic faith, which even The NT tells us was not called "Christian".

But similar literature was in circulation 300+ years before Constantine, it just wasn't identified by the foreign term "Christian".
Of course not, as these Jewish Messianic believers had not so much as even heard of any such a word or name, much less applied it to themselves.
And the DSS naturally preceeded any NT writings, hence could not be expected to contain these latter compositions.
This is what testifies to the genuineness of The DSS; If NT texts had been found amongst The Scrolls, The Scrolls contents would be in question as to being subjected to latter intropolations.

I agree with your position that Constantine adulterated, interpolated, and corrupted many ancient documents to promogulate His "version" of church history and doctrine. Enforcing his dictates by torture, murder and mayhem, Nothing that any honest person could not look upon and recall the saying, "By their fruits shall you know them" but his savagery ought not to reflect badly upon on all of those innocent saints that he and his henchmen were daily butchering and burning to further his imperial ambitions.

Hope this explains my position better.
Peace, Sheshbazzar

mountainman

Thanks Sheshbazzar, I think it does.

However to focus my point, the innocent saints
had names like Arius of Alexandria, Sopater, etc.
They were neo-pythagorean "saints" because all
the Pre-Nicene "christian saints" (and persecutions)
were part of the fabrication/fiction.

The phrase understand the tree by its fruit is appropriate
in this context. The new tree was implemented at Nicaea.
The Nicene power structure perpetuated it.

The older tree, the ancient traditions, embodied
in the 1800 year old standing obelisk of Karnack
was chopped down by Constantine, IMO.


Best wishes,


Pete

VoxRat

Well, I can't say I've read enough to have much of an opinion on it.

Just focusing on the one little tidbit I brought up - the correspondence between Trajan and Pliny - I'd like to know what the evidence is for forgery or interpolation. Since the references to Christianity are not particularly fulsome (nor in Suetonius, IIRC) - and I never had the impression that the early Christians were all that subtle - I'd like to know if there's any positive evidence for such chicanery.

J-D

Pete sees no methodological reason to produce positive evidence. That's what's wrong with his methodology.

mountainman

Already discussed in this thread are the following ...

Positive evidence item (1)

Statistical chronological distribution of "pagani"
in the epigraphic habits of fourth century christians:

The word "pagani: first appears in christian inscriptions
from early 4th century, and the earliest use in the
Law Codes in Codex Theodosius 16.2.18 (c.370).
It is a word coined by christians -- of the towns and
cities.


Positive evidence item (2)

Statistical chronological distribution of "christian names"
in the payri of fourth century Egyptian christians:

R.S. Bagnall, Bulletin of the American Society
of Papyrologists (1985), p.105 writes ...

There are very few examples before c.300
of the personal names which christians in Egypt
later preferred to adopt. From c.340 onwards,
references to christians, churches and christian
authorities multiply as do the numbers
of favored christian names".



Best wishes,



Pete

Huon

There are so many christian kings of France or England who bear the names Peter or Paul...

The argument of R.S. Bagnall is not very convincing. Names are given to children according to family traditions. Jesus is a spanish boy name, and is almost never given to a french boy.

Roger Pearse

I'm not aware of any. As far as I was aware (no refs) the proposition that they were forged was raised in the 19th century when certain German academics were attempting to redate Christianity to the second century, and so had to dispose of all the data to the contrary. But no-one much liked or believed it and everyone knew that Tertullian already refers to the existence of the correspondence and jokes about Trajan's decision in his Apologeticum, ca. 194 AD.

The manuscript tradition for book 10 is now very limited, since the only real manuscript, the Saint-Victor, was destroyed at the printers (Aldus Manutius himself) as part of the publication process. (There is nothing sinister about this; it happened routinely in the 16th century) Only a fragment remains. I don't recall if there is any other manuscript witness for the text, and so modern scholars must depend on the Aldine edition.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

mountainman

Certainly, Edwin Johnson who wrote a century or more ago,
considered Tertullian "a stooge" of Eusebius ....

"[the fourth century was] the great age of literary forgery,
the extent of which has yet to be exposed"
...[and]...

"not until the mass of inventions
labelled 'Eusebius' shall be exposed,
can the pretended references to Christians
in Pagan writers of the first three centuries
be recognized for the forgeries they are."

--- Edwin Johnson, "Antiqua Mater:
A Study of Christian Origins"

mountainman

Bagnall's argument simply lists papyri findings in Egypt
which, like Spain and Gaul at that time, were provinces
of the Roman empire. The stats are quite simple.

Had the new and strange writings of the "christian religion"
been available to the general public before the fourth century
we may have expected there to be more "christian names".

The explosion of "christian names" and "Pagani inscriptions"
occurs in the fourth century. Not before.
The evidence is quite clear.


Best wishes,



Pete

J-D

We were discussing your assertion that the references to Christians in Pliny's correspondence with Trajan were interpolations. You have not provided any positive evidence for this assertion. Your methodological principles do not require you to: that is what is wrong with them.