avi

My apologies, Pete, didn't mean to have spin confound your erudite musings with my careless questions.

Yes, Toto is correct, as usual. I do insist that the evidence regarding the excavation at Dura Europos suggests the facility with which those who desired to commit foul play, could have proceeded.

I am struck by the carelessness with which the dig was excavated. I am amazed by the description of the discovery of the fragment of the Diatessaron.

As regards the summary of spin, Ducks and geese both waddle.

I am singularly unconvinced, even if authentic, i.e. not forgeries, that these frescoes are "christian", or even representing "christian" themes. How does one arrive at the notion that the particular frescoe shown at Toto's link, represents a new testament fable, and not an even earlier description of Greek or Hindi medical/nursing caregiving? There is some text on the side of the bed, does it relate in some way to one of the gospels? Alternatively, does it correspond to "Lazarus"? Is the figure standing above the invalid, waving his hand imperiously, supposed to be JC? How do we know it is not John the Baptist, or the Greek Healer, Asclepius?

Has anyone attempted to reconstruct a forgery attempt? In other words, has any team of university students, five or six, say, with some shovels and paint, gone to a site, somewhere, painted some murals, waited a couple days for the paint to dry, then filled in the walls with dirt, wait a few months, and then excavate, to see what the "frescoes" look like??

I am far, far removed from possessing even a scintilla of knowledge about christianity, but, is it reasonable to equate this group of symbols with that particular religion's ideology?
women going to a tomb;
a woman (why Samaritan?, is that what the fresco states?) at a well;
a male figure striding on a watery landscape, as would be expected after a heavy rainstorm in the desert;
raising of "lazarus"--> Does his name appear on the fresco?
a shepherd with his flock of goats;

If we asked a group of theology students to list four or five chief characteristics of Christianity, which differentiate it, from other religions, would any of these Dura Europos fresco topics listed above, appear on their documents?

Very remarkable.
Unbelievable, in fact, given the hostility that existed at that time, between the two religions.

Well, good for the scholars. Hurrah.
Great thinking fellows. (and gals!)

Now, here's a SLIGHTLY different view:

Desert.
Water...

Desert.
Water...

What? You think that someone went to the trouble to build an "impluvium", fill it with water, from a source located 90 meters below ground level, and then employ this bathtub, as a vehicle to permit baptism?

What? are you nuts? How many "baptisms" would Dura Europos experience in a year's time? Even if the women were constantly pregnant, and giving birth at a rate of one live birth per year, how often do you imagine the people baptising the 50% who did not die as infants, within two weeks of birth? Are you informing me, teaching me, in essence, for I am ignorant, that infant baptism was not only practiced, in the third century, but a formal part of the doctrine back then???? I think Michael Servetus would dispute that logic, based upon his having read both new and old testaments in their original languages.

Have you ever lived in the desert? Try it some time. Then come back and explore the notion that this "impluvium" existed to perform "baptisms". I suspect this is an illustration of what Pete and spin, bless them both, refer to, erroneously, as "retrojection".

Nonsense. spin is not confused. He is opinionated, illogical, and has not the faintest idea of the correct meaning of the word "falsify", but, he is not confused.

avi --> a very ignorable forum participant

spin

Cutting the crap out of your last post, you wrote:
But then, given that you have enough evidence from Dura to penetrate the thickest skull, it's not a matter of being convinced or unconvinced at all. I'd guess you've been taking lessons from someone like your local neighborhood Jehovah's Witness on how to duck and weave evidence against your faith.

1. On one wall is a fresco with David and Goliath, both figures captioned with their names, so the context is is extremely limiting, Jewish or para-Jewish. Obviously, not Jewish because there is a synagogue and the rest of the figures don't reflect Jewish traditions. Para-Jewish, then. Adam and Eve are also there to highlight the point, below the good shepherd. How many para-Jewish religions featuring the good shepherd do you know??
   
   
2. Next we have an inscription which doesn't make sense unless one realize the use of the christian habit of using the nomina sacra,
   
   Code:

   TON   XN     IN   UMEIN    MNESKESQE PROKOU
   The christ Jesus is yours, remember, Proclus.

   The nomina sacra is formed by the first letter of the sacred name and the last letter for grammatical purposes, so X for christos and I for Ihsous, but in the accusative, hence the Ns.
   
   There's another similar inscription on the same wall.
   
   
3. Then there were two Sator squares of the type
   
   R O T A S
   O P E R A
   T E N E T
   A R E P O
   S A T O R
   
   This word square was taken over by christians, featuring the frequent alphas and omegas of the christian tradition, and found at various christian sites. It contains an anagram of "PATERNOSTER", ie "our father". Hidden within it is the cross formed by the two directions of the word TENET.
   
   
4. The other frescos:
   1. The woman at the well,
   2. The healing of the paralytic (3 phases),
   3. Walking on the water (Peter & Jesus, boat in the background),
   4. The women at the tomb
   All of these as images are known only from the christian tradition. Together it is extremely hard not to see a group of christian images.

Given that para-Jewish context of David and Goliath, it is irresistible to see the consilience of all of these things being obvious reflections of the early christian religion.

Now, feel free to do your JW-style denial.


spin

mountainman

Dear avi,

One maxim that has impressed me over time is the one which runs like this .... It is not really the answers which are important, but the questions themselves. When questions arise, sooner or later the answers will be framed by time and the application of multi-disciplinary research and their contemplation by many minds over many generations. Therefore, it is not really the answers which are important, but the questions themselves.

Your questions are certainly NOT careless, and I strenuously reject with an utter abhorence the notion of spin that these questions arise as a result of a
Thanks for being persistent with these questions in the face of massive authoritarian-follower displays.
.
I reject the notion that the answers are a done deal.
We have --- AS ALWAYS --- a natural spectrum of skeptical belief.
We might exemplify by this ....

(1) Dura-Europs most certainly represents "early christian archaeological evidence".

(2) Dura-Europs perhaps may (or may not) represent "early christian archaeological evidence".

(3) Dura-Europs most certainly does not represent "early christian archaeological evidence".

I place your position and my position at item (2) above.
We are skeptically questioning the integrity & interpretation of the evidence.
I place spins position in the region of (1).
Spin has managed to convince himself that an authority on the issue exists.


Now, lets look at this item (2) again, where I think we are.


(2) Dura-Europs perhaps may (or may not) represent "early christian archaeological evidence".

The NOT here represents the skepticism.
There are at least 2 pathways:

(1) None of the evidence was fabricated, but the interpretation is questionable.
(2) At least some of the eidence MAY HAVE BEEN fabricated or "RESTORED" by an over enthusiastic Yale Divinity College devotee 1920/1930.

I do not outrightly dismiss EITHER of these claims.
They are to be separately evaluated in their own right.
And I am happy to contribute to both.

Therefore, no apologies are required avi.
Certainly none to me since I share the right to ask explore both these pathways (1) and (2) immediately above.

This comment is a preface to the main arguments.
I will respond at a later time in more detail to these issues.
I encourage you to remain skeptical avi (and others).
Your questions are not careless but valuable.
Be well.

avi

Thank you Pete, you are always very generous, to a fault sometimes, with praise, even when undeserved....

I know that I am ignorant, and it is annoying, not only to other forum members, some of them less tolerant than you Pete, but also to me, because there was a time, before my current senility, when I was as sharp as spin is today.

The dullness which I perceive, is not remedied by your kind hearted comments, but nevertheless, they are most welcome. You and Philosopher Jay always have kind words for everyone, and that encourages the morale of the forum, as a whole, in my opinion.

That is not to write, however, that there is no place for sharp dialogue, and exchanges, we certainly need to preserve a proper aura of skeptical demeanor on the forum, and I only wish to represent that I regret not having found the forum twenty years ago, when I still had a few neurons floating about....

yes, you are exactly correct. Well written.

Absolutely concur.

I would add, if it were deemed useful, a third possibility, admittedly a longshot, namely that OTHERS had planted, intentionally, or unintentionally, evidence, during the several MILLENIA when Dura Europos remained unknown by the western world.

We have passing reference to a ninth century monk living there for more than a few months.....

avi

avi

1. Para-Jewish is a step in the right direction, where "right direction" = open mindedness about organized religion as practiced 1700 years ago....
   
   One may consider, as a possible alternative, (not saying that this is the correct, or even the most likely possibility), the notion that this "church-house" of Dura Europos, which we view STATICALLY, as if fixed in time, in fact evolved in purpose and direction over time. Perhaps, originally, it was converted from a wealthy man's home, with impluvium, to a Jewish guest house, for visiting rabbis, complete with the necessary water basin required by the orthodox believers, for purification.
   
   
   Quote:

   Originally Posted by spin Next we have an inscription which doesn't make sense unless one realize the use of the christian habit of using the nomina sacra, Code: TON XN IN UMEIN MNESKESQE PROKOU The christ Jesus is yours, remember, Proclus. The nomina sacra is formed by the first letter of the sacred name and the last letter for grammatical purposes, so X for christos and I for Ihsous, but in the accusative, hence the Ns. There's another similar inscription on the same wall.

   Thanks spin, and 99.9% probability, you and the rest of the world are correct, and I am WRONG. That's fine. Have you considered this possibility:
   
   It is the eve of the destruction of Dura Europos. The inhabitants are looking out over the river valley, 90 meters below them, where they see, encamped, an army of 4000 soldiers, whose only payment depends upon spoils gained from pillaging Dura Europos.
   
   One guy, assigned to the detail of filling in the house-church with dirt, as the dirt ascends, writes this "christian" graffitum on the wall. He knew that tomorrow would be his last day on planet earth.....
   
   We know, or think we know, that Roman soldiers returned to Dura Europos, a century after the fall, again contesting with the Persians, for control of the Euphrates for trade. I am afraid we do not know with certainty, who filled in the synagogue, mithraeum and "house-church", with dirt. For all I know, it could have been mother nature.
   
   When I was in Koln, several decades ago, I was amazed at the depth of the Roman baths, compared with the surface, some 2000 years after their construction. A good 20 feet, 7 meters, of soil had filled in the baths, until exposed by an RAF bomb in the 1940's. Do you suppose there had been an army of volunteers filling in the bath with soil? I think it had been abandoned, like Dura Europos, and the wind filled in the man made space with soil.
   
   
   Quote:

   Originally Posted by spin Then there were two Sator squares of the type R O T A S O P E R A T E N E T A R E P O S A T O R This word square was taken over by christians, featuring the frequent alphas and omegas of the christian tradition, and found at various christian sites. It contains an anagram of "PATERNOSTER", ie "our father". Hidden within it is the cross formed by the two directions of the word TENET. The other frescos: The woman at the well, The healing of the paralytic (3 phases), Walking on the water (Peter & Jesus, boat in the background), The women at the tomb All of these as images are known only from the christian tradition. Together it is extremely hard not to see a group of christian images.

Thanks, I appreciate your effort. Always enjoyable, generally educational, and more often than not, stimulating. This is no exception. Well done. Great job.

I don't really know what you mean by JW style. But, I will do my best to address your very appropriate comments.

First, though, a question: Does the name Lazarus appear on the side of that illustration of the invalid? I ask, because, frankly, my own vision, even with incredibly thick glasses, is inadequate to resolve the characters. (I am legally blind)

If not, that would not, of course, repudiate your contention that it was an image of Lazarus, but, it would simply be reassuring to those of us who are accustomed to all manner of forgery and fraud, and who seek reassurance about interpretation, whatever the source....

So, about David and Goliath: Why would you assume, that a fresco with David and Goliath refers to a "christian" sect? To my way of thinking, such a fresco, proximate to a Jewish synogogue, implies that the house, at that time, was a Jewish refuge from the haste, hustle, and bustle of the Roman fortress town. I write, "at that time" because, as far as I am concerned, this house was not suddenly redecorated, on the eve of conquest by the Persian army, but instead was a dwelling, occupied by various inhabitants, for more than a century, and I presume, maybe incorrectly, that one or more of the inhabitants, enjoyed painting.

Who can argue the point, without accurate spectroscopic data, that the paint on the walls, is not of a single year time frame, but rather, spread out over several decades....?

Ai yai yai.

Spin......

Holy cow.

That statement is not worthy of your profound erudition, my friend.

Of course we have no idea whether or not the house, at some point in time, was occupied, owned, or designed, by Jews. Most likely, in view of its proximity to the synagogue, it was constructed, initially, or in redesign, under Jewish supervision.

This is just elementary, dear Watson.

You, who read both Greek and Hebrew, must realize, far better than I ever will, the central importance of water for purification, in the Jewish holy rites. This house was surely designed, originally, for some wealthy Jewish merchant or rabbi, in my opinion, and the frescoes, many of them, reflect that occupancy. Christians don't waste time and effort with David and Goliath, and spend a negligible amount of time on Lazarus as well. These are old testament stories, carried over to the new testament, but, it is the new testament original stories which take precedence in elaborating the Christian faith, in my opinion, as one wholly ignorant of all religions.

A theme, recurring in the New Testament, is the notion of poverty, of abandoning one's wealth, of giving to the church all one's worldly possessions, in order to pass through the gates to heaven. David and Goliath don't figure in the "turn the other cheek" modus of Christianity.

Sorry, I am not buying it.....

avi

spin

I'm trying to hold your hand. It is no concession. You are obstinantly standing with your head in the dike here and in need of someone to help you get it out.

You are not responding to my post, but maintain a commentary of the view from where your head is.

I guess you'd think that the film "Final Destination" was about likely real events as well.

We know of course when street access was filled.

It goes back to a comment I made about the Jehovah's Witness approach.

This was my bad memory which I have since clarified. It wasn't Lazarus, but the healing of the paralytic. Looking at the fresco, it shows the scene of the healing in three phases: the presentation with the paralytic on his bed, the intervention by Jesus and the carrying of the bed.

So, not Lazarus, but a narrative embodied in the fresco showing the healing.

If you check, you'll see I didn't. I gave you the choice of Jewish or para-Jewish. I eliminated the Jewish option because there was a substantial Jewish synagogue not too far away. One could add that while a few Jewish images might be expected in a para-Jewish religious establishment, you wouldn't expect any non-Jewish images in a synagogue. Attempts to overlook the non-Jewish nature of the other frescos will only reflect the desire to overlook them.

With christian narrative.

You haven't read the reports closely enough about what is said regarding the building.

Quack.

Christian themes. But spin how do you know they were christian themes? 1. Because they are found in christian literature and 2. Because they are not found in other religious literature.

What makes you think so Lestrade?

I appreciate the effort in contortedness.

That assumes you understand why the fresco was featured in the house. Christians were inherently metaphorical in their use of images from the Hebrew religion. David has always been a symbol of the line of messianism and thus a precursor to Jesus. The slaying of Goliath here is symbolic and to underline the fact, the image above is of the garden of paradise. Goliath in this context is a representation of the world that christians must overcome, that David has overcome.

But then you're probably stingy enough to cut off your knows to spite your face.

Four christian motifs in a context of other christian indicators should supply the lubricant to remove your head from the dike.


spin

steve_bnk

As to crossing botn the Pacifc and Atlantic in ancient times.

Thor Heyerdahl

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_He...s_Ra_and_Ra_II

'..In 1969 and 1970, Heyerdahl built two boats from papyrus and attempted to cross the Atlantic from Morocco in Africa. Based on drawings and models from ancient Egypt, the first boat, named Ra, was constructed by boat builders from Lake Chad in the Republic of Chad using papyrus reed obtained from Lake Tana in Ethiopia and launched into the Atlantic Ocean from the coast of Morocco. After a number of weeks, Ra took on water after its crew made modifications to the vessel that caused it to sag and break apart. The ship was abandoned and the following year, another similar vessel, Ra II was built using totora reed instead, by boatmen from Lake Titicaca in Bolivia and likewise set sail across the Atlantic from Morocco, this time with great success. The boat reached Barbados, thus demonstrating that mariners could have dealt with trans-Atlantic voyages by sailing with the Canary Current.[7]..'


'..In the Kon-Tiki Expedition, Heyerdahl and five fellow adventurers went to Peru, where they constructed a pae-pae raft from balsa wood and other native materials, a raft that they called the Kon-Tiki. The Kon-Tiki expedition was inspired by old reports and drawings made by the Spanish Conquistadors of Inca rafts, and by native legends and archaeological evidence suggesting contact between South America and Polynesia. After a 101 day, 4,300 mile (8,000 km) journey across the Pacific Ocean, Kon-Tiki smashed into the reef at Raroia in the Tuamotu Islands on August 7, 1947.

Kon-Tiki demonstrated that it was possible for a primitive raft to sail the Pacific with relative ease and safety, especially to the west (with the wind). The raft proved to be highly maneuverable, and fish congregated between the nine balsa logs in such numbers that ancient sailors could have possibly relied on fish for hydration in the absence of other sources of fresh water. Inspired by Kon-Tiki, other rafts have repeated the voyage. Heyerdahl's book about the expedition, Kon-Tiki, has been translated into over 50 languages. The documentary film of the expedition, itself entitled Kon-Tiki, won an Academy Award in 1951...'


'..In the Kon-Tiki Expedition, Heyerdahl and five fellow adventurers went to Peru, where they constructed a pae-pae raft from balsa wood and other native materials, a raft that they called the Kon-Tiki. The Kon-Tiki expedition was inspired by old reports and drawings made by the Spanish Conquistadors of Inca rafts, and by native legends and archaeological evidence suggesting contact between South America and Polynesia. After a 101 day, 4,300 mile (8,000 km) journey across the Pacific Ocean, Kon-Tiki smashed into the reef at Raroia in the Tuamotu Islands on August 7, 1947.

Kon-Tiki demonstrated that it was possible for a primitive raft to sail the Pacific with relative ease and safety, especially to the west (with the wind). The raft proved to be highly maneuverable, and fish congregated between the nine balsa logs in such numbers that ancient sailors could have possibly relied on fish for hydration in the absence of other sources of fresh water. Inspired by Kon-Tiki, other rafts have repeated the voyage. Heyerdahl's book about the expedition, Kon-Tiki, has been translated into over 50 languages. The documentary film of the expedition, itself entitled Kon-Tiki, won an Academy Award in 1951..'.

mountainman

Also absolutely concur. There are now at least three general pathways of skeptical approach against this mainstream supported JW certitude with respect to the evidence ....

(1) None of the evidence was fabricated, but the interpretation is questionable.

(2) At least some of the evidence MAY HAVE BEEN fabricated or "RESTORED" by an over enthusiastic Yale Divinity College devotee 1920/1930.

(3) At least some of the evidence may have been introduced to the site sometime between the rise of the christian state religion and the 20th century. In addition to the 9th century monk, we are told by the historians Ammianus (23.5.1-15) and Zosimus (3.14.2) that the entire Roman army lead by Julian travelled to the region called Zaitha (or Zautha [Zosimus]) near the abandoned town of Dura April 363 CE. Parts of the Roman army also fell back through Dura April 363 CE, to provide a second visit for some to Dura.

mountainman

Since the good shepherd has been around since 1000 BCE this would make a good research project.
According to Snyder, "Klauser supposes the Good Shepherd ("criophorus") of early Christianity
is 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 ..."

So the question may now become how many Jewish-Hellenistic religions were there.
The answers to these questions do not miraculously point to "christianity" as a sole contender.



(1) Have the graffiti been dated?

(2) Interpretation of XN and IN as "NOMINA SACRA" is entirely conjectural.

This is a classic case of christian poetic licence by conquest of the evidence.
That XN only makes sense as the "nomina sacra" form of christ is ludicrous.
That IN only makes sense as the "nomina sacra" form of jesus is equally ludicrous.
How do we know that what the graffiti artist wanted Proclus to remember was his TV and Dishwasher?

The Christian archaeology business is very lucrative isn't it?
When we find any "X" it miraculously becomes and marks the spot of buried treasure for Christ.
When we find any "I" it miraculously becomes and marks the spot of buried treasure for Jesus.
I dont buy this.
We wont have a general theory for the appearance of the nomina sacra in the earliest greek ms
and yet you want to "intepret" random "X's" and random "I's" as the PRESENCE OF THE HJ.
I am highly skeptical of this hocus pocus "proof" via nomina sacra.




As you admit that this word square was "taken over by christians" you have your own refutation
that this specific evidence is not some sort of pre-christian use.



Utter non skeptical conjecture.
How many women visited wells in antiquity who were not christian?
How many healings are reported by the Greek Asclepius and/or the Persian Mani? (Dura is close to Persia)
How many people walked on tidal flats or on river flats around the Euphrates?
How many women visted tombs in antiquity who were not christian?

Have we out of interest examined any images of the Manichaeans, for example?
Were there various form of Jewish sects living on the border of the Persian and Roman empires at Dura?
What other explanations might be appropriate as a second "guess" other than "It's Christian!!" ?




But its not together. Its a dog's breakfast. Just like this group of christian images
direct from the Pope's artistic appreciation of "early christianity" ....



CAPTION Description from "Ante pacem" .... Plate 13:
"The sarcophagus located in Sta. Maria Antiqua, Rome.
"Likely the oldest example of Early Christian plastic art"

Description:

"The Teaching of the Law stands in the center, with a Good Shepherd immediately
to the right and an Orante immediately to the left. 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. 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"

I think the ambiguity of the evidence - both the elements and their union - permits skepticism.

At the end of the day I think it is more reasonable to argue the case that Dura-Europs perhaps may (or may not) represent "early christian archaeological evidence", rather than the case that Dura-Europs most certainly represents "early christian archaeological evidence".



.

Toto

Name one other than Christianity

The form was adopted. The content is Christian.

Don't stop at asking the question. What is your answer?