"a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifixion"

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8566
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:53 am

mlinssen wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:48 am
It says 'in crucem' and I would expect 'ad crucem' for tying someone 'to' a cross. If, in fact, crux means cross here - but 'in' here seems to mean 'into', and this isn't a clear-cut case of "crucifying someone as we know it"
Why would you expect that?

If the Latin in means "into" here, are you saying that this poor fellow was somehow inserted into a cross/stake (in crucem)? How would that work?

User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 592
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by mlinssen » Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:12 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:53 am
mlinssen wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:48 am
It says 'in crucem' and I would expect 'ad crucem' for tying someone 'to' a cross. If, in fact, crux means cross here - but 'in' here seems to mean 'into', and this isn't a clear-cut case of "crucifying someone as we know it"
Why would you expect that?

If the Latin in means "into" here, are you saying that this poor fellow was somehow inserted into a cross/stake (in crucem)? How would that work?
I'm going to ignore you for the day Ben. You seem to have an off-day. Get well soon!

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8566
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:42 am

mlinssen wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:48 am
It says 'in crucem' and I would expect 'ad crucem' for tying someone 'to' a cross. If, in fact, crux means cross here - but 'in' here seems to mean 'into', and this isn't a clear-cut case of "crucifying someone as we know it"
mlinssen wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:12 am
I'm going to ignore you for the day Ben. You seem to have an off-day. Get well soon!
There is truth to what Martijn says here about me having an off day. I certainly have less of a filter right now than I usually do.

My knowledge of Latin, however, remains unimpaired, and (for the sake of those keeping up with such matters) Martijn's expectations concerning the Latin prepositions ad and in are ungrounded.

User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 592
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by mlinssen » Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:32 pm

Well, I had 5 years of Latin in grammar school but it's been a while. Ad versus in is a difficult beast, and Perseus has a mini bible on the both of them

To make a long story short: to tie on in or to a crucem is not a very convincing example of Hannibal beating the canonicals to it

I could give you a link to some sites to give you an idea how you tie people "into a cross", Ben, but those definitely are NSFW

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8566
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:49 pm

Well, I had 5 years of Latin in grammar school but it's been a while. Ad versus in is a difficult beast, and Perseus has a mini bible on the both of them

To make a long story short: to tie on in or to a crucem is not a very convincing example of Hannibal beating the canonicals to it

I could give you a link to some sites to give you an idea how you tie people "into a cross", Ben, but those definitely are NSFW
The point remains that, if you want to say (in Latin) that you have affixed someone to a stake/cross, in crucem is a perfectly valid way of putting it.
Last edited by Ben C. Smith on Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 6636
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by MrMacSon » Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:37 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:49 pm
The point remains that, if you want to say (in Latin) that you have affixed someone to a stake/cross, in crucem is a perfectly valid way of putting it.
Where has anyone actually said they did that? Where have the Church Fathers recounted someone as doing that?

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8566
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:08 pm

MrMacSon wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:37 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:49 pm
The point remains that, if you want to say (in Latin) that you have affixed someone to a stake/cross, in crucem is a perfectly valid way of putting it.
Where has anyone actually said they did that? Where have the Church Fathers recounted someone as doing that?
Sorry, I am not sure what you are asking.

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 6636
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by MrMacSon » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:18 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:08 pm
MrMacSon wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:37 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:49 pm
The point remains that, if you want to say (in Latin) that you have affixed someone to a stake/cross, in crucem is a perfectly valid way of putting it.
Where has anyone actually said they did that? Where have the Church Fathers recounted someone as doing that?
Sorry, I am not sure what you are asking.
Where have the Church Fathers recounted someone as 'affixed to a stake/cross', in crucem ?

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8566
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "a commonplace belief among historians of the early church that early Christianity did not emphasize Jesus’ crucifix

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:24 pm

MrMacSon wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:18 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:08 pm
MrMacSon wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:37 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:49 pm
The point remains that, if you want to say (in Latin) that you have affixed someone to a stake/cross, in crucem is a perfectly valid way of putting it.
Where has anyone actually said they did that? Where have the Church Fathers recounted someone as doing that?
Sorry, I am not sure what you are asking.
Where have the Church Fathers recounted someone as 'affixed to a stake/cross', in crucem ?
The church fathers? Offhand, I am not sure. Why?


Post Reply