Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Jax »

^ Or Spain.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Charles Wilson »

Jax wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 6:34 am
Charles Wilson wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:49 pm
Jax wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 3:17 pm3: The original language of the early Christian texts is koine Greek.
AND
Jax wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 4:12 pmOh? Are there Jewish and Aramaric Christian writings associated with early Christianity? I am aware of only Greek texts.
...Though this is a Toy Analysis, you may find the Aramaic Bible Groups, the Latin Loan-Word Groups and other Groups as well who will expand Linguistic Analysis until you become sorry that you ever brought up the subject.

Was it never a Gospel until it was written solely in Greek? Why? Why not?

CW
:wtf:
JAX!!! We can always count on you for erudite commentary.
You are correct with your Emoticon. "WTF" indeed!

What are the alternatives? One such alternative was that there was a person who composed the material that became a Gospel in his head and wrote the entire thing in Greek.

Who?

1. Nicholas of Damascus. He was there for decades with Herod and Archelaus, he was a very prolific writer. He could have written a Stylized History that was appropriated by Josephus. Greek was not Josephus' first language. Further, Nicholas had a brother, Ptolemy, who was the keeper of Herod's Seal. As Herod rolls on towards his death, Ptolemy produces a New Will with the imprint of Herod's Seal. It's Real Official like.

So, Nicholas of Damascus is the first Suspect for an all Greek Gospel.

2. Mucianus. Mucianus was Poly-Linguistic, a world traveler and could also produce Oratory in Greek. He grazed on both sides of the pasture, so to speak, and loved Titus very much. He could have composed a Paean to Titus, and probably did.

Mucianus is Suspect number 2, although there MUST have been someone to follow and write the endings after the death of Domitian, after Domitian received "Damnatio Memoriae". Mucianus survives a few years after the ascension of Vespasian (Through around 75?).

Speculation: "Marcion" => "Mucian"?

3. Zakkai, although he would probably have been an Editor. Someone KNOWS Judaic Culture and especially the Temple apparatus, including the Galilean Organization amongst the Priests, to a degree seemingly not possible to someone from the Countryside. Perhaps Matthean Sensibilities come from here, I dunno.

4. Mark, himself. Perhaps Mark was a cultured observer from the Court in Rome who, in his spare time, after his day job was over, composed a story in Greek, from materials taken from the Sack of Jerusalem. Nicholas of Damascus' materials were probably already in Rome.

It is not enough to say "The NT was composed in Greek" and this is NOT a criticism of you, Jax. You can go to Peshitta.Org and elsewhere to see criticisms of the Greekies as the claim is made - with a terrific amount of research - that the NT was originally an Aramaic Set of Documents.
[Edit Note: The Criticism here is not that the NT was written completely in Greek (I believe the story is much deeper than that). The Criticism is that the NT is presented to us as if the NT fell out of the sky into some Scribe's hands and it was written in Greek. WHO could have written such a story. My contention is that there are very few individuals who could have written the NT ex nihilo. WHO? If not, then what was the Process that led to the NT? See Post above.]

If none of these work, then the Post stands: Someone or Group of People, laid out Fragments of Stories from various people in various languages and began organizing the material into the story of a savior/god, written in Greek. If the Original was in Aramaic, then it was translated into Greek, which became the popular Medium of thought. That, however, simply moves the Process back one level.

It is not yet a Gospel.

When did it become one? When it was translated into a completely Greek Document?

Best to you, Jax,

CW
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Jax »

Charles Wilson wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 12:17 pm
Jax wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 6:34 am
Charles Wilson wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:49 pm
Jax wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 3:17 pm3: The original language of the early Christian texts is koine Greek.
AND
Jax wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 4:12 pmOh? Are there Jewish and Aramaric Christian writings associated with early Christianity? I am aware of only Greek texts.
...Though this is a Toy Analysis, you may find the Aramaic Bible Groups, the Latin Loan-Word Groups and other Groups as well who will expand Linguistic Analysis until you become sorry that you ever brought up the subject.

Was it never a Gospel until it was written solely in Greek? Why? Why not?

CW
:wtf:
JAX!!! We can always count on you for erudite commentary.
You are correct with your Emoticon. "WTF" indeed!

What are the alternatives? One such alternative was that there was a person who composed the material that became a Gospel in his head and wrote the entire thing in Greek.

Who?

1. Nicholas of Damascus. He was there for decades with Herod and Archelaus, he was a very prolific writer. He could have written a Stylized History that was appropriated by Josephus. Greek was not Josephus' first language. Further, Nicholas had a brother, Ptolemy, who was the keeper of Herod's Seal. As Herod rolls on towards his death, Ptolemy produces a New Will with the imprint of Herod's Seal. It's Real Official like.

So, Nicholas of Damascus is the first Suspect for an all Greek Gospel.

2. Mucianus. Mucianus was Poly-Linguistic, a world traveler and could also produce Oratory in Greek. He grazed on both sides of the pasture, so to speak, and loved Titus very much. He could have composed a Paean to Titus, and probably did.

Mucianus is Suspect number 2, although there MUST have been someone to follow and write the endings after the death of Domitian, after Domitian received "Damnatio Memoriae". Mucianus survives a few years after the ascension of Vespasian (Through around 75?).

Speculation: "Marcion" => "Mucian"?

3. Zakkai, although he would probably have been an Editor. Someone KNOWS Judaic Culture and especially the Temple apparatus, including the Galilean Organization amongst the Priests, to a degree seemingly not possible to someone from the Countryside. Perhaps Matthean Sensibilities come from here, I dunno.

4. Mark, himself. Perhaps Mark was a cultured observer from the Court in Rome who, in his spare time, after his day job was over, composed a story in Greek, from materials taken from the Sack of Jerusalem. Nicholas of Damascus' materials were probably already in Rome.

It is not enough to say "The NT was composed in Greek" and this is NOT a criticism of you, Jax. You can go to Peshitta.Org and elsewhere to see criticisms of the Greekies as the claim is made - with a terrific amount of research - that the NT was originally an Aramaic Set of Documents.

If none of these work, then the Post stands: Someone or Group of People, laid out Fragments of Stories from various people in various languages and began organizing the material into the story of a savior/god, written in Greek. If the Original was in Aramaic, then it was translated into Greek, which became the popular Medium of thought. That, however, simply moves the Process back one level.

It is not yet a Gospel.

When did it become one? When it was translated into a completely Greek Document?

Best to you, Jax,

CW
Thanks man. I enjoy sounding all erudite and shit.

You do realize that this thread is about making factual statements about the Christian cult, right?

Like in Dragnet "Just the facts mam".
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Charles Wilson »

Secret Alias wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:06 am I thought I would make a thread about indisputable historical facts about early Christianity. I don't think there are a lot of things which are certain about the tradition.
Jax wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 2:45 pmNot so sure about 1.
Ben C. Smith wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 2:47 pm#2 is hardly noncontroversial on this forum or in certain critical circles.
Jax wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 3:11 pmDidn't even make it past the first post. :lol:

We're doomed.
The Referee sez: "Personal Foul...Wilson...Fifteen Yards for Piling On...Marked off from the spot of the Foul..."

Wilson: "Awww, Jeez, man, I barely touched him...Hey, Ref!...You cannot be serious!!!..."

I plead, "Not guilty".
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by John2 »

Jax wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 6:25 am
1: Early Christian texts are usually identified, I think, by the use of the Nomina Sacra. Nothing like this has been found in the caves at Qumran.

Well, there are contractions (and dots) for various names of God in the DSS, including the Damascus Document, but otherwise I gather it a Greek thing and most DSS are in Hebrew or Aramaic. But I gather some Greek DSS use the same abbreviation for "kurios" as the NT (KC).

2: yeshua means YVHV saves. Or God's salvation at the end of time. I think.

Yes, and I think it's interesting that the Damascus Document mentions seeing God's "yeshua" at the end of time in the context of a place called Damascus and the expectation of a singular Messiah and the rejection of the oral Torah and opposition to a figure who rejected the written Torah, like in Ebionite Christianity.
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8021
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Peter Kirby »

Christianity first had influence on the emperor during the reign of Commodus (180-193).

Hippolytus
But after a time, there being in that place other martyrs, Marcia, a concubine of Commodus, who was a God-loving female, and desirous of performing some good work, invited into her presence the blessed Victor, who was at that time a bishop of the Church, and inquired of him what martyrs were in Sardinia. And he delivered to her the names of all, but did not give the name of Callistus, knowing the acts he had ventured upon. Marcia, obtaining her request from Commodus, hands the letter of emancipation to Hyacinthus, a certain eunuch, rather advanced in life. And he, on receiving it, sailed away into Sardinia, and having delivered the letter to the person who at that time was governor of the territory, he succeeded in having the martyrs released, with the exception of Callistus. But Callistus himself, dropping on his knees, and weeping, entreated that he likewise might obtain a release. Hyacinthus, therefore, overcome by the captive's importunity, requests the governor to grant a release, alleging that permission had been given to himself from Marcia (to liberate Callistus), and that he would make arrangements that there should be no risk in this to him. Now (the governor) was persuaded, and liberated Callistus also. And when the latter arrived at Rome, Victor was very much grieved at what had taken place; but since he was a compassionate man, he took no action in the matter. Guarding, however, against the reproach (uttered) by many — for the attempts made by this Callistus were not distant occurrences — and because Carpophorus also still continued adverse, Victor sends Callistus to take up his abode in Antium, having settled on him a certain monthly allowance for food. And after Victor's death, Zephyrinus, having had Callistus as a fellow-worker in the management of his clergy, paid him respect to his own damage; and transferring this person from Antium, appointed him over the cemetery.
Cassius Dio
There was a certain Marcia, the mistress of Quadratus (one of the men slain at this time), and Eclectus, his cubicularius;3 the latter became the cubicularius of Commodus also, and the former, first the emperor's mistress and later the wife of Eclectus, 7 and she saw them also perish by violence. The tradition is that she greatly favoured the Christians and rendered them many kindnesses, inasmuch as she could do anything with Commodus.
Herodian
He announced his intentions to Marcia, whom, of all his mistresses, he held in highest esteem; he kept nothing from this woman, as if she were his legal wife, even allowing her the imperial honors except for the sacred fire. When she learned of his plan, so unreasonable and unbecoming an emperor, she threw herself at his feet, entreating him, with tears, not to bring disgrace upon the Roman empire and not to endanger his life by entrusting it to gladiators and desperate men. After much pleading, unable to persuade the emperor to abandon his plan, she left him, still weeping.
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Jax »

11: Of the copies of early Christianity that we have, only three Gospels and Revelation are thought to have been copied in the 2nd century, making them the earliest texts that we have. They are...

a: Matthew as p104, p103, and p77.

b: John as p52, and p90.

c: Mark as p137

d: Revelation as p98

John is the writing with the most copies made at 20 early texts. Matthew is next at 15 early texts with Revelation at 5 and Mark at 3.
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Jax »

12: The Gospel of John is by far the most popular of the NT material that we have at 32 copies. gMatthew is a close second at 24. Then it is Acts at 17, then gLuke and Romans at 12, then Hebrews at 10, Then 1 Corinthians 8, Revelation 7, then 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and James at 5 each.

Then you have gMark, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, and 1 Peter at 4 each. Finally at 3 copies or less is all the rest.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Secret Alias »

Could someone do a 'where we're at' and list all the individual points and have everyone vote on what's indisputable? I am not that smart.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Indisputable Historical Facts About Early Christianity

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Jax wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 3:49 pm 12: The Gospel of John is by far the most popular of the NT material that we have at 32 copies. gMatthew is a close second at 24. Then it is Acts at 17, then gLuke and Romans at 12, then Hebrews at 10, Then 1 Corinthians 8, Revelation 7, then 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and James at 5 each.

Then you have gMark, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, and 1 Peter at 4 each. Finally at 3 copies or less is all the rest.
The highlighted phrase runs beyond the evidence, does it not? More numerous as a statistic of mainly Egyptian papyri, yes. But we suffer from a serious dearth of early manuscripts from almost all other relevant areas (Rome, Greece, Asia, Syria, Palestine).
Post Reply