beowulf wrote:Antigonus was made king by the invading armies of Parthia.
....
Herod was as Jewish as the quisling Antigonus and a supporter of Rome
The issue here, in this thread, is the symbolism used when one anointed king replaced another.
The symbolism requires an appropriate symbol. Antigonus was the enemy of a large section of the Jews as a murderer and collaborator. He cannot be used as a symbol .
And you are judge and jury as to what people can use or look to as a symbol?
Mandela's ANC committed many black on black killings - and yet - and yet - walk into any township in South Africa and you will find symbols, pictures, of Nelson Mandela - reflecting the great symbol that man has become, not only in SA, but in the whole of Africa.
beowulf, you are posting nonsense.....please don't clutter up this thread with this type of anti-Antigonus rhetoric.
------------------------
Please don't click the link if one does not want to see distressing pictures...
The Truth About South Africa: ANC's black on black killing spree
ÈP monogram
Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna 5th century
Crowned christogram between two staurograms
and an achievement of a clipeus with a christogram supported by two peacocks.
Sarcophagus in the Sant´Apollinare in Classe in Ravenna. The inscription reads: HIC REQUIESCAT IN PACE THEODORVS VB ARCHIEPISCOPVS. [10]
Someone could not make up his mind what image of the cross to use....
Sarcophagus of the Resurrection. The oldest and grandest passion-sarcophagus. The cross of the Christ monogram and laurel refers to Christ's victory over death. Originating from the catacomb of Domitilla.
Which is a combination of the Greek letters chi (Χ) and rho (Ρ), first two letters of Christ - the rho (P) being used in the tau-rho combination. Since the tau-rho combination was the earliest christian symbol, (Hurtado) a symbol that did not relate to any christological title, it looks, to me, that the Chi-Rho is the updated or replacement version. Thus, if the early christians 'saw' their crucified gospel Jesus figure reflected in the tau-rho - they would likely see that same reflection in the rho (P) of the Chi-Rho. In other words; the tau-rho early christian symbol was not discarded but gained new life, for those christians, within the chi-rho symbol. i.e. with the chi-rho symbol they now named the crucified one as Christ.
Stylised tau-rho between two peacocks ...
ÈP monogram
Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna 5th century
Crowned christogram between two staurograms
and an achievement of a clipeus with a christogram supported by two peacocks.
Sarcophagus in the Sant´Apollinare in Classe in Ravenna. The inscription reads: HIC REQUIESCAT IN PACE THEODORVS VB ARCHIEPISCOPVS. [10]
This symbol does not have the chi (Χ) symbol.... so.....an earlier tau-rho.
Someone could not make up his mind what image of the cross to use....
Sarcophagus of the Resurrection. The oldest and grandest passion-sarcophagus. The cross of the Christ monogram and laurel refers to Christ's victory over death. Originating from the catacomb of Domitilla.
Couldn't the Chi-Rho symbol crown a plain everyday cross?
Sure, but the guy might have wanted to keep his options open for when he met his heavenly maker.....
In any case, this important manuscript evidence about the Christian appropriation of the tau-rho device rather clearly means that earlier (and still echoed) views, such as the influential analysis of early Christian Jesus-monograms by Sulzberger must be judged incorrect on a couple of important matters, and that any history of early Christian symbols must take account of this. Most obviously, contra Sulzberger, the Christian tau-rho monogram did not first emerge in the post-Constantinian period, and is not to be understood as a derivation from a prior Christian usage of the chi-rho. Instead, the evidence cited from P45, P66 and P75 gives instances of the Christian use of the tau-rho considerably earlier than datable instances of the Christian usage of the chi-rho, and well before Constantine! Indeed, as Aland noted several decades ago, to go by this manuscript evidence, the earliest Jesus-monogram appears to be the tau-rho, not the chi-rho. Moreover, and perhaps of equal significance, the instances of the tau-rho device in these manuscripts (i.e., in abbreviations of the Greek words for “cross” and “crucify” in NT passages referring to Jesus’ death), the earliest Christian uses extant, show us that this compendium was used in this early period, not simply as a general symbol for Jesus, but more specifically to refer reverentially to Jesus’ death.
This thread is like someone trying to make a cow out of hamburger.
Beowulf- actually, a case can be made that the Jewish royalty- both Hyrcanus or Aristobulos (the sons of Alexander) were tyrants enslaving the people with ritual and tithing. The theocracy was crypto-subjugation at its best. And Tacitus made that case in a seldom quoted passage for its perceived antisemitism.
steve43 wrote:This thread is like someone trying to make a cow out of hamburger.
Beowulf- actually, a case can be made that the Jewish royalty- both Hyrcanus or Aristobulos (the sons of Alexander) were tyrants enslaving the people with ritual and tithing. The theocracy was crypto-subjugation at its best. And Tacitus made that case in a seldom quoted passage for its perceived antisemitism.
I really don't like where you are trying to go with this post....it's not called for and services no purpose whatsoever in relationship to the OP. Kindly refrain from attempts to turn this thread into a political football.
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
