Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 03-17-2008, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Which only goes to show that for all practical purposes that cross that Jesus was crucified on was indistinguishable from the other crosses found there

Or someone was engaging in fraudulent misrepresentation.

Quote:

and that the idea of a specifically Christian cross did not exist.

Not only that, the idea of a specifically Christian corresponding set of nails did not exist.

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

mountainman · 03-17-2008, 07:51 PM

Supreme imperial military dictatorships

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Pachomius received refugees from Constantine.
The refugees were the living ex-priests.
The Boss had closed pagan services.
The temple culture was fucked.

Where did the Tibetans go when Mao moved in?
Indian refugee settlements.

Pachomius foresaw the need for desert communities 324 CE.
Nice year that year. The eastern empire had a new Boss.
Exodus commenced.
Do you get the drift?

The desert communities consisted of political refugees.
Many of these refugees were (fleeing for their lives) pagan priests.

Thank you for proving my claim.

How is father Pachamius usually inferred as being a christian?
Because Jerome translating his works "says so"?
I dont think so.

The case has yet to be argued as I have outlined very briefly above, and I am preparing a way for it. We have only ever been interested in one side of the story of christian origins -- the side of victory. But in which field did this victory actually occur in ancient history? Who wrote this history? Who preserved this history? What did they do to their opponents? What did their opponents say? etc. The ground of the fourth century is releasing up its secrets.

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

patcleaver · 03-17-2008, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

There is no such thing as direct translations. The translator uses a source language Lexicon, and possibly some grammar rules, to determine the words and structure of the original text, usually in a non-native language. Then he decides what it means in view of his biases. Then he writes what he thinks it means in his own language.

I don't quite get your point. If there were such a thing as a direct translation, what would be different?

Direct translation would require each word in the source language to have a corresponding word in the target language that had exactly the same meanings so you could translate word-for-word; and both languages to have the same grammar so you did not have to rearrange the words; and for all common idioms metaphors, similes, and analogies to be the same for both languages. This is exactly what most people think translation is - just a mechanical process - its a myth.

All translations between real languages depend on the biases and presuppositions of the translator.

Amaleq13 · 03-17-2008, 09:17 PM

Unsubstantiated bluster as I expected.

spamandham · 03-17-2008, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

1) Is the nomina sacra JS ever used for Joshua?
2) Is the nomina sacra CT ever used for "Chrestos"?

I had a similar question when I first saw this which is a chicken and egg problem. Did the abbreviations precede 'christ jesus' or the other way around? Were these same abbreviations used in non-'Christian' contexts? (I don't know, this is a real question)

Toto · 03-18-2008, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

1) Is the nomina sacra JS ever used for Joshua?
2) Is the nomina sacra CT ever used for "Chrestos"?

I had a similar question when I first saw this which is a chicken and egg problem. Did the abbreviations precede 'christ jesus' or the other way around? Were these same abbreviations used in non-'Christian' contexts? (I don't know, this is a real question)

Joshua is the same name as Jesus. Chrestos was at times a variant of Christos.

Nomina sacra are the subject of a lot of speculation. There were abbreviations, but had some extra meaning.

Review of The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins

Quote:

In attempting to explain the origin of the nomina sacra H. reminds the reader that the horizontal stroke above the nomina sacra was originally used to indicate Greek letters that were to be read as numerals. Furthermore, certain first- and second-century Christian texts suggest that Christians were familiar with the use of gematria (an exegetical practice in which numbers are associated with certain words on the basis of the value of their letters). The Epistle of Barnabas, for instance, associates the number 318 in Genesis 14:14 with the cross (T = 300) and Jesus (IÊ = 18) since the Greek letter tau looks like the cross and 18 is the numerical value of the first two letters of IÊSOUS. H. sees in this text an already- formed association between Jesus' name and the abbreviation IÊ. He sees a connection between this and the Hebrew word for "life" which also has a value of 18. The combination of the supralinear stroke with this unusual form is sufficient to suggest this as the origin for all Christian nomina sacra. "Jesus' name is an unsurpassed candidate in early Christian piety as a factor capable of generating the sort of special treatment that is represented in the scribal practice that we call nomina sacra" (117).

Google nomina sacra for more. There are raging debates over the meaning of nomina sacra. But they are a Christan phenomena.

Doug Shaver · 03-18-2008, 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

Direct translation would require each word in the source language to have a corresponding word in the target language that had exactly the same meanings so you could translate word-for-word; and both languages to have the same grammar so you did not have to rearrange the words

I see. Well, I quite agree that that will never be possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

All translations between real languages depend on the biases and presuppositions of the translator.

Do you think this means there are no good translations, or just that it's difficult for a lay person to know when he or she has found one?

Ben C Smith · 03-18-2008, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Is the nomina sacra JS ever used for Joshua?

What Toto said is true; Jesus and Joshua are the same name. And yes, I believe LXX scribes sometimes used the nomen sacrum IS for the figure from the Hebrew scriptures. (Note that nomina sacra is plural.)

Quote:

Is the nomina sacra CT ever used for "Chrestos"?

CT? You must mean ChS. Since many ancients spelled the name in question as either Chrestus (Chrestos) or Christus (Christos), this question needs further specification.

Quote:

That the inscription was written c.256 CE requires the invocation of the cone of silence for the period from then until c.1920's. Is this correct?

I do not know what a cone of silence is.

Ben.

Jeffrey Gibson · 03-18-2008, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

2) Is the nomina sacra CT ever used for "Chrestos"?

Umm, Pete ... there is no letter "C" in Greek. The Greek letter with which "Christos" and "Chrestos" begin is X ("Chi").

Jeffrey

mountainman · 03-18-2008, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Is the nomina sacra JS ever used for Joshua?

What Toto said is true; Jesus and Joshua are the same name. And yes, I believe LXX scribes sometimes used the nomen sacrum IS for the figure from the Hebrew scriptures. (Note that nomina sacra is plural.)

I still dont know why someone termed the image "David and Goliath" but this seems Hebrew bible, which would mitigate that the JS on the border of the mural may have refered to a Joshua.

Quote:

CT? You must mean ChS. Since many ancients spelled the name in question as either Chrestus (Chrestos) or Christus (Christos), this question needs further specification.

And, Toto's link stated:

Quote:

"In attempting to explain the origin of the nomina sacra
H. reminds the reader that the horizontal stroke above the nomina sacra
was originally used to indicate Greek letters
that were to be read as numerals"

So the obvious question is, can these letters represent numbers, and if so, what number is represented by the JS overbar?

Quote:

That the inscription was written c.256 CE requires the invocation of the cone of silence for the period from then until c.1920's. Is this correct?

I do not know what a cone of silence is.

Sorry about that chief. It was an impenetrable cone which protect conversations from being overheard in "Maxwell Smart". Essentially I mean that the basis of the archaeological dating relies on the importance of the claim that the room (possiibly the entire house, --- the roof area??) in which the mural was found was buried entire in the year c.256 when a wall of the town collapsed, and could not have been entered at any time between that year and 1921. I dont have this data, but I think that's the claim.

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

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

03-17-2008, 09:17 PM	#64
Amaleq13 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Eagle River, Alaska Posts: 7,816	Unsubstantiated bluster as I expected.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.