mountainman

Doug,

I am here attempting to defend a prosecution of a case of imperial forgery, and insist that the evidence in our position is in such a state, in such a century, that the indications of massive forgeries are already quite apparent.

The chronology of christian origins at the moment has Eusebius and a complex stack of emminent palaeographers' certifications mutually co-supporting each other in the mainstream framework, and a very small number of totally ambiguous archeaological citations external thereto, the bulk of which are touted by Vatican Tour Guides.

I am entering this case with an open mind on a loaded question. The year is 2008 and I am an advocate for more C14 analysis on "things purportedly pre-nicene".


Best wishes,


Pete Brown

mountainman

We could start with the Testimonium Flavianum. Or even the letter from Jesus to Agbar. Your man Eusebius claims both of these to have been on his desk. My postulate is investigating the possibility that he was the forger of these two interpolative texts, supposedly written by Josephus and Jesus H in the first century. That Eusebius actually may have instead "penned at a particularly shameful hour" in the fourth century, under lavish imperial sponsorship, this "evidence".

OVER.

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

mountainman

Ted,

I just thought I should clarify this point.

Does a numbers racket ever have to make sense? Have you not ever known of some massive corporation swamping a market for a "common sense reason". Documents may be examined internally or externally (eg: politically). The Eusebian fiction postulate suggests we examine them in a political sense. Unfortunately, political actions dont always make sense.

I am not here to defend or to attack the political actions (in terms of the christians and the pagans), but to attempt to unravel the weave of history supplied as our heritage by the christian victors over the pagans. Analysis in the first instance implies simply classifying the data according to your postulate(s).



Perhaps in the time of Constantine it was? Who knows? The records of EUsebius were preserved by the political party at the top of the mafia heap for the rest of the fourth century, and then we know the rest of the story .... as a history of fraud.

The history of the time of Constantine is very fragmentary, and we have no pagan account of it whatsoever from someone writing at the time (312 until 337 CE). What opposition was preserved? This resolves to an analysis of politically oriented polemic extant in the writings from the fourth century onward, and must include Arius, Athanasius, Pachomius, Julian, Jerome, Ammianus, Augustine, Cyril and Nestorius; in the nature of the anathemas of 4th/5th century "Ecclesiastical Councils"; in the nature and understanding of heresies as acts of seditious belief against the belief of the emperor, etc, etc



Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Amaleq13

But aren't you still confusing the mere use of symbols by an "underground" movement and the notion that they would be expected to leave behind "hard archaeological evidence"? In the context of the present discussion, it is only the latter that is relevant unless you think that it is reasonable to expect the sort of graffiti you describe to survive.

Would you expect that sort of evidence to survive for two thousand years?

mountainman

This is of course a very good question.

I have elsewhere remarked, after looking at the references today available to the historicity of the followers of Asclepius in the period of the first four centuries, that if the followers of christianity had one hundredth of the citations now available to the followers of Asclepius, I would not be here arguing over the evidence we (think we) have.



Best wishes,


Pete Brown

MarkA

Good points.

I admit I am totally unfamiliar with the symbolism or anything else about scientology (except that it has a lot of celebrity followers).

If the building was destroyed in manner consistent with ancient destruction (by fire, earthquake, etc) events, would there be any evidence of the manner of its use? Are there any symbols, distinctive architecture or anything else that could be useful in identification? If so then presumably the other buildings used for meetings would also contain such symbols and the proliferation of these remains would be useful in estimating their importance and numbers.

Apart from this, records would show that this group existed, that it owned property, that it had famous and important followers and that these records would be diverse and would be from friendly, neutral and hostile sources. Is there any evidence that any buildings later used by the christians were owned by them or sympathisers before the fourth century?

If an important sympathiser owned a building and allowed it to be used by the christians as a meeting place and a centre of worship would it not be bequeathed to the group after the faith became the state religion? Is there any evidence or tradition that shows this? According to Paul Johnson in his A History of Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk), the church at Rome was very rich. In support of this he quotes Dionysius of Corinth and Dionysius of Alexandra. So it is certainly probable that such evidence should exist.

MarkA

There are thousands of pottery fragments with inscriptions, drawings, decorations on them dating back to the Neolithic. Yet not one shard with a christian symbol on it survives before the fourth century? This sort of thing could well be simply inscribing a plate or cup with a christian symbol that could well be classed as graffiti.

There are probably quite a few buildings in Europe that have had these symbols painted or plastered over. I have no proof of course but there are many churches in England that have had their pre-Reformation frescoes uncovered and restored in recent times. Santa Sophia I understand still has christian motifs and art works covered over by Islamic symbols while other examples have been uncovered and restored.

So I would expect such symbols to survive two thousand years and I would expect at least one would have been discovered.

Toto

I actually didn't remember what the symbol was - there is an official symbol here that I think I have never noticed before, but it appears that Scientologists often use a CROSS !?! Early Christians seem to have often used symbols that might be associated with pagan or Jewish religions, which complicates the search for early Christian remains (is a cross a Christian symbol, a pagan symbol, or just two scratches?)

I think that the Scientology symbol is a registered symbol for veterans to use in Arlington National Cemetery, so you might find some of those symbols, with dates.

I am not that familiar with the building, but I know that it contains a restaurant and meeting rooms, and other non-distinctive rooms. I think that most Scientology buildings are ordinary buildings that have been converted to their use. The only thing distinctive is the funny S in Scientology, and the word Scientology itself. But those are modern advertising. I doubt that early Christians would have advertised themselves. And if the Scientology lettering were destroyed, I don't think that anything would mark the Hollywood building as a Scientology building.

There are a lot of businesses in the area that are run by Scientologists, but you wouldn't necessarily know that, except that there might be a copy of Dianetics for sale. There is the L Ron Hubbard School of Administration, but as far as I know, you would not find Scientology symbols in its classrooms.

So an archeologist of the future might be able to figure out that a building was owned by Scientologists. But there are a number of lesser cults around that would probably slip under the radar.

There is that church at Dura Europa. Otherwise, Christians seem to have met in house churches, and there was probably nothing distinctive about the houses.

The problem with this is that I suspect that Christians exaggerated the wealth and prominence of early Christians, and may even have claimed some Roman aristocrats as Christian who were not.

Amaleq13

You are comparing the evidence left behind by entire civilizations with that left behind by a small, illegal religious sect? Sorry, I don't find that generalization reasonable.

In order to "expect" to find this evidence you must first assume that there were many people willing to risk placing a permanent symbol of their illegal association on their household items and then you must assume that you would recognize any such symbol for what it was. I don't consider either of those assumptions reasonable.

IMO, your expectations are simply unrealistic. This is just a weak argument from silence.

spamandham

Why do you keep implying that Christianity was a small, illegal sect prior to Constantine? If you have evidence of this, please present it.