StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 7:18 am
PS, SA's attack on KK is unworthy.
Thanks for the kind words, Stephen. I'll let those experts do their thing.
If anyone is interested in facts and what such inscriptions looked like in a Christian prayer house with nomina sacra for God, Jesus and Christ, I would like to point them to the mosaic from Megiddo. .
MeggidoMosaique.jpg
Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 7:38 amWhy must it be assumed Marcion revered Luke? Why must this always be a starting point?
Joseph, this is really ridiculous.
Every day several Marcion threads are opened in this forum, the starting point of which is exactly the opposite. This forum has now become the Marcionite Speculations Forum. Sinouhe is right: some people here are really obsessed with Marcion.
The constant focus on the topic can be grating.
That doesn't justify poorly reasoned interpretations of the facts, which is what you have been offering.
Inscriptions are public writings. No one is going to chisel out a phrase that contained a secret or holy word that stood in the middle of fucking marketplace. My wife doesn't know what I am thinking while she drones on about PF Changs having 34 Weight Watcher points but regular Singapore noodles only 7. I am able to conduct two conversations at the same time. But I wouldn't be able to do so if my computer was connected to the large flatscreen TV in our living room.
Because Christianos is meaningless. Christianoi is meaningless. Chrestos, Chrestoi. Meaningful.
You could be Chrestos be part of the Chrestoi in 5th century BCE. What the fuck is Christian? It's a bullshit meaningless term that means absolutely nothing beyond convention today. It is bad Greek.
For anyone "interested in facts," as Kunigunde chose to put it.
Okay, let's hear it. The OP is not about any graffiti or private inscriptions or private papyri, but about a dedicatory inscription on a church building, i.e. something official. I presented the comparable case of a dedicatory inscription from Megiddo.
Is there anything similar in your thread (which I read two weeks ago and found really interesting)? Does an "official" ancient church inscription or document exist in which the words Jesus or Christos are spelled out?
For anyone "interested in facts," as Kunigunde chose to put it.
Okay, let's hear it. The OP is not about any graffiti or private inscriptions or private papyri, but about a dedicatory inscription on a church building, i.e. something official. I presented the comparable case of a dedicatory inscription from Megiddo.
Is there anything similar in your thread (which I read two weeks ago and found really interesting)? Does an "official" ancient church inscription or document exist in which the words Jesus or Christos are spelled out?
Let's hear it? This is your thread. The title of the OP says "proves." The burden of proof here is on you. That burden has not been met.
What has happened is that some of your assumptions have been traced back to some of your other assumptions, which you are now asking to be disproven. That is not a proof.
For anyone "interested in facts," as Kunigunde chose to put it.
Okay, let's hear it. The OP is not about any graffiti or private inscriptions or private papyri, but about a dedicatory inscription on a church building, i.e. something official. I presented the comparable case of a dedicatory inscription from Megiddo.
Is there anything similar in your thread (which I read two weeks ago and found really interesting)? Does an "official" ancient church inscription or document exist in which the words Jesus or Christos are spelled out?
One issue here is that you are salami slicing the data to conform to your presuppositions. You are ruling out of court any evidence from "graffiti," "inscriptions," or "private papyri" and arbitrarily (yes it is arbitrary) positing that the only relevant evidence is "a dedicatory inscription." The rest is deemed irrelevant and discarded. This is the kind of thing that people do when they don't like what the evidence says. They attempt to draw smaller and smaller circles around what they will accept as relevant evidence, until their (unproven!) assumptions can stand unchallenged because they have eliminated all the evidence that shows it to be wrong. It's a kind of motivated reasoning.
For anyone "interested in facts," as Kunigunde chose to put it.
Okay, let's hear it. The OP is not about any graffiti or private inscriptions or private papyri, but about a dedicatory inscription on a church building, i.e. something official. I presented the comparable case of a dedicatory inscription from Megiddo.
Is there anything similar in your thread (which I read two weeks ago and found really interesting)? Does an "official" ancient church inscription or document exist in which the words Jesus or Christos are spelled out?
It's also not trivial to do your homework for you here because the database of inscriptions doesn't necessarily explain the full archaeological context of each inscription.
Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 6:55 pm
IGLSyr 2 391 (ca. 363, or 563?), Greater Syria and the East: Syria and Phoenicia
One God and His Christ (Χριστὸς), the Helper. To Marianos and his children. Help Maríades and Saakonan, the master builders. This was completed in the month of Xandikos, in the year 411* [611?].
* According to the Antiochene era, beginning 49/48 BCE.
Is this a "dedicatory inscription"? To know one would have to track down the literature on this inscription.
To answer the question one would have to repeat for the dozens of early Greek and Latin inscriptions that I shared, then the few hundred more that I did not share because they didn't have an early date associated.
It's a ton of work in service of what seems to be a misguided premise in the first place. Equally discouraging is the expectation here of additional salami slicing when more data is presented.
Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:38 pm
One issue here is that you are salami slicing the data to conform to your presuppositions. You are ruling out of court any evidence from "graffiti," "inscriptions," or "private papyri" and arbitrarily (yes it is arbitrary) positing that the only relevant evidence is "a dedicatory inscription." The rest is deemed irrelevant and discarded. This is the kind of thing that people do when they don't like what the evidence says. They attempt to draw smaller and smaller circles around what they will accept as relevant evidence, until their (unproven!) assumptions can stand unchallenged because they have eliminated all the evidence that shows it to be wrong. It's a kind of motivated reasoning.
So again your answer is just about "what I do".
Can you at least say what exactly you want to have evidence presented for? Do you think you have proven that the use of nomina sacra among Christians was not as widespread as thought, because you have found some private inscriptions and papyri in which this is not the case?
I'll look at your next post tomorrow or maybe I'll leave it because the discussion seems too pointless to me.
