Robert Tulip

1.

Jeffrey Gibson

Exactly. So unless I misunderstood what you wrote when you spoke, apparently disparagingly, about how "spin [sic] must trumpet this late Syrian desert find shows how very sparse the evidence really is", I take it that you agree with me and Spin that the issue isn't how much evidence of pre-Constantinian Christianity we have, but that we have enough to falsify Pete's claims about Christianity being wholly a Constantinian invention.

Jeffrey

Clivedurdle

I think a philosophical problem comments that an old and ancient boat was in a very poor state, but after a huge amount of effort was repaired, and also a second identical boat was made using some old bits and lots of new bits.

Which is the original? Is there an original?

Are we looking at a 4th century almost complete rebuild?

It is easy to forget how much recycling went on. The Island of Kos is regularly hit by earthquakes and was invaded regularly. A templar castle for example uses stones mainly from older buildings. Why should not Constantine also reuse some older stories to make something new?

Jeffrey Gibson

You are speaking of what's known as the "Ship of Theseus" problem:

http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/theseus.html

http://www.productiveflourishing.com...onal-identity/

which I think you have misunderstood.

Why would we be?

And a rebuild presupposes that there was something before practically identical to the rebuild from which the rebuild was made. This hardly supports Pete's "no Christianity before Constantine invented it" thesis.

And why you think it might, as you apparently do, is beyond me.

Jeffrey

Juma

Seriously. If you argue that these pictures must be of jesus then you read something into yhese pictures that really isnt there.

Clivedurdle

There is a London Bridge in America. There is one here. We are not looking at a completely new xianity that is fourth century, but we are looking at an almost complete rebuild and refurbishment, which is actually very difficult to work out what is older.

Chili

But the second one is only a look-alike of the first one in the same way as the movement that Constantine brought to a dead-stop were all look-likes too. This simply is true because there is no plural for the word einai in Greek as the 'essence of Christ' that brings unity about instead of a scatter that makes hell kown on earth by those same look-alikes as empowered imposters this time.

avi

Closed environment.

There are two problems here:
a. We know that one century after the destruction of Dura Europos, Emperor Julian and his troops traversed the city. Did they halt their river voyage to examine the state of the former Imperial metropolis?

Maybe not. Maybe they just waved, as they rode past on their ships.

I don't believe in polls, but, if one were to ask the forum as a whole, whether or not EACH MEMBER of the forum, were they the all powerful Roman Emperor, sailing past the fallen citidel, would they issue instructions to the crew to make camp on the shore for a week to explore the ancient city, site of the death of many of the legion's ancestors, I guess the vast majority of forum members would ask the crew to halt the invasion, and explore the ruins.

b. We ASSUME, in my opinion, INCORRECTLY, that Dura Europos was uniquely BURIED in sand by the victorious army.

You have just defeated the enemy. They have all been captured/slaughtered. You have grabbed their gold, and now, what? YOU ARE GOING to issue shovels, and instruct your exhausted troops to start digging?

NONSENSE.

The winds of time buried Dura Europos, not the victorious army.

c.. Why should the French Archaeologists in the 1920's have been the first to investigate Dura Europos? Why not Napolean's army, one hundred twenty years earlier? (Egypt/Rosetta Stone) Why not Turkish armies, after the fall of Constantinople? Why not Mongol armies, since we know, without any doubt, that the Mongols invaded both Aleppo and Damascus. How did they get there? What? You mean, in your opinion, the Mongol Army was not smart enough to know about the former Roman fortress?

Of course the Mongols would have excavated Dura Europos, looking for GOLD.

WHERE'S the evidence that Dura Europos lay UNMOLESTED for 1700 years? Does spin have pollen samples indicative of soil found in Eastern Syria, 1700 years ago, but not found there today? Pollen is after all, DNA, so maybe spin has some pollen from the wall paintings, to demonstrate that the dirt removed was put there, by wind or by shovels, 1700 years ago.

I didn't think so.

The other aspect of spin's comment that rankles me, a great deal, is this bit about the "CHRISTIAN BAPTISTRY".

Folderol.

It was a JEWISH home, not a christian house church. Jews are CLEAN minded, in fact, their doctrines demand strict washing rituals, and contribute, in my opinion, to the overall health of the society, thereby.

In my opinion, Dura Europos is an interesting piece of archaeology. I completely disagree with those who imagine that there was really a Christian congregation, engaged in their bizarre sectarian rituals, including drinking blood, and eating human flesh, RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE JEWISH SYNAGOGUE.

The most damning indictment of spin's nonsensical belief that the EVIDENCE reveals the Christian nature of the house in question, is acknowledged by Clark Hopkins. Sorry I don't have a quote, having loaned my copy to someone, who has more or less absconded with it, but, that's ok, it is just a book--she needs it, I don't. Anyway, Clark, as I remember, I hope not in error, indicated that

a. absent that tiny fragment of the Diatessaron, sitting on top of the dirt bucket, i.e. awaiting discharge, there would have been no way to DECISIVELY conclude the Christian nature of the house. That's not my opinion, that's his statement, in his book.

b. Hopkins had found DOZENS of important documents, during his several years of excavation there in Syria, but, unfortunately, WITHOUT exception, they all turned to dust, before his eyes, upon excavation.

Then, how fortuitous to have "found" the fragment sitting in plain site where just about anyone could see it. That fragment was not fragile. It was in good shape. Did I mention where it was found?? Exactly where? Yeah. Not the very most security conscious excavation.

Jeffrey Gibson

Why would an infinitive have a plural form?

Jeffrey

spin

I literally don't understand your thought here. We have scenes from the healing of the paralytic: the man is on his bed on the right; the figure above is giving a command; and the man is seen on the left carrying the bed he was on. This story, though well-known from the gospels, is known from nowhere else. Next we have the boat on the sea in the background with two figures in the foreground walking on water. One of the two men has his feet sunken in the water and is reaching out to the other man (headless because of a lacuna) who, standing on the water feet visible, arm straight out, seems in control of his situation. Again, not a miracle story known from elsewhere, but well-known from the gospels. The women walking to the tomb are another well-known motif from the gospels.

A skeptic may have doubts about any one of these images being definitely christian, but the combination of the three should quash any skepticism, especially in the context of the image of the good shepherd also known to have been used by christianity and that of David and Goliath, a christian image inherited from Jewish tropes. We add to this the fact that the nomina sacra was found at the same site, fixing Jesus Christ to these images.

You have to be in total denial to reject the obvious conclusion that we are dealing with a gospel-centered cultic site featuring stories of Jesus. One has to be in total denial not to accept the clear evidence. Yet mountainman, who claimed

"I have repeatedly claimed that if unambiguous evidence can be produced to refute the HYPOTHESIS then I would retire from the field of investigation."

still denies the evidence. There is only one reason I can see for him to be in denial: he has invested too much of himself into the nonsense he has been peddling for many years.