stephan huller

στ can also have the value of six and be represented by the episemon or digamma at least in later Byzantine traditions. This substitution allows stauros to have a value of 777 like Jesus = 888. st (6) a (1) u (400) r (100) ο (70) s (200)

DCHindley

These "lucky charms" are called "Amulets," and are wonderful with goat cheese, etc.

Seriously, though, a well known text is written in very small letters, folded to fit into a recess in the amulet. I believe that Christian texts that are included in amulets may include Nomina Sacra abbreviations. They were specifically created to influence how things got done.

An amulet was designed to catch the attention of a specific demon engaged in a specific activity, with the intent to redirect or thwart only that demon doing only that activity.

In the Greco-Roman world and Ancient Near East in general, the world was seen as a giant household. Demons acted like household servants and cause things to happen in the world household. These demons are very numerous and highly organized. They only do what they are told, respond only to their specific boss and no one else, and only then if the proper passwords and "paperwork" have been submitted. In that era, the near-unanimous opinion was that the Magi priests of ancient Media had the best understanding how this kind of thing worked. Greek practitioners of this Median magic were known as "Magicians" although they were not Magi priests.

The amulet was often worn around the neck, but may also have been placed in a key spot in a home or public/private place. If worn, the amulet served as a warning to a wizardly troublemaker that the wearer is taking precautions against his/her magic and employing some of his/her own. If hidden somewhere in the home or agora, the only being the user will expect to take note of it will be the demon whose action is being actively thwarted.

The Dura Manuscript does not appear to have had magical intent, or you'd see magical formulae or commands of some kind. Or there would be other paraphernalia that would accompany a magical amulet (special materials, specifically colored oil lamps, metal foil sheets as writing materials, animal/human bones, etc).

DCH

spin

Your crease theory fails on two counts:

1) the bar over στα is at a 30 degree angle from the direction of the creases in that spot, and

2) Kraeling had direct access to the fragment and declared the reading as certain.

This is downright ridiculous. Without any shame you can simply ignore the fact that the letters under the bars are στα, Ιη and Θυ, each strongly pointing to the common christian usages of the over-bar, and propose for no sensible reason in the contexts given that they could be numbers. You're just making a nonce of yourself.


I don't think so. But you are going to play coy regarding the nomina sacra as though that is a reasonable approach, but it's not. The fudge over the στα bar fails and there is nothing unusual about any of those betters with the bar being read as nomina sacra.

Overworking it...

1b) and the women who came with him...
1c) the genitive form of a name ending in -αιου that coincides well with "the mother of the sons of Zebedaios", who the gospel narrative tells us did come with him.

2b) the combination of the day of preparation and the sabbath as found in Lk 23:54 in the context of all the above and the reference to Joseph of Arimathea below.

4) someone named Jo[seph] related to this Erinmathea. (Perhaps you could make a suggestion for a Ιω[] that would be a more likely fit in the context. Well, no, you couldn't.)

Given the size of the fragment, there are so many christian references and suggestions that your denialism seems totally unwarranted. But what other approach can you take now?

This just shows that you don't know what you are talking about. All you need do is check out the list supplied here to see that many are more than two letters in length. But you should note what Kraeling says on p.9:

[T2]in the text of Mark in the Codex Bezae the verb forms σταυρωσον and σταυρωθη are abbreviated στν and στη respectively, which lends weight to the suggestion that the era of the fragment is intended to be the abbreviation of σταυρωθεντα.[/T2]

There is nothing strange or untoward about Kraeling's analysis. It is quite reasonable and reflects the sort of usage we can expect. As different verbal forms used as nouns have been evinced, he is merely providing another that makes sense in the context, though nothing else would--unless you can propose something that takes the article τον but can end in an alpha, starting with sigma-tau.

Contrary to your opinion, the text is laden with christian indicators, especially ones found in a close locus in the gospels as they are here.

In what meaningful way is it novel? As Kraeling points out, nominalized forms of the verb σταυροω are also rendered as nomina sacra in Codex Bezae, so the idea is not novel in that regard. Three letter nomina sacra are quite frequent, so not novel there either. How is it novel?? I'd say that it just plain isn't all that novel at all. You're clutching at straws.

Again, none of the bars matches the signs of creasing. And Kraeling who had eyes on the real object has no doubt, giving no comments relating the creasing and the over-bars, so you have no reason to. You are once again looking for workable conjecture to sew doubt where there is little room for any.

The fragment is laden with gospel material, despite your denial. Add to that there are three nomina sacra, none of which is in any way odd, though the use of the participial σταυρωθεντα is a hapax legomenon. Insinuating numbers here is unreasonable, so we are left with clearly christian scribal evidence.

stephan huller

This is just ridiculous. Pete has to be removed from the forum. His bullshit isn't wanted here any more.

Duvduv

Whoa, whoa, whoa...........something of a dictatorial personality here. Sounds like "you're either with us or you're against us......." Did you call Torquemada?!

https://www.google.com/search?q=inqu...fm%3B450%3B334

stephan huller

Hey religious guy

since you relish in this conspiracy theory what's your stand on the tradition that the Torah was written not by Moses but by Ezra centuries later? Unlike this bullshit theory there's actually good evidence for that one

DCHindley

Yes, this is where they found Dura Parchment 24.

DCH

Duvduv

Your secular intolerance as an anti-religious redneck bigot is clear, but even if we discussed this in A DIFFERENT thread or offline it would serve no purpose, so why would you even ask my opinion about this or any other matter even if it were relevant to this thread??

Even your Samaritans buddies, for as much as they hate Ezra the Scribe, don't believe the Torah was handed down by anyone other than Moses. But such discussions are of no significance are they? Besides, WHAT does any of this have to do with your intolerant attitude towards MM??

Duvduv

DCH, I still don't understand how the concept of "harmonizing" the gospels could have been an occupation of anyone who believed in a canon of divine inspiration. There would be nothing to reconcile for all the reasons provided by classic Christian apologists. Despite the fact that none of the ancient apologists ever provided an explanation of exactly WHO established the canon of the gospel which then were believed to need harmonization.

Obviously the same unknown authorities who allegedly authorized the canon itself saw the contradictions and saw no need to harmonize anything as part of the canon at all.

In any case, it's too much too build a whole theory of early Christianity and its official 4 gospel canon based on this fragment.

spin

Have you ever wondered why Ben Sira knows of Nehemiah but shows no knowledge of Ezra whatsoever?