Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

With the working theory that Thomas, given his anti-Judean and anti-Judaic stance, as well as his logion 60 with the Samaritan carrying a/ their lamb into Judea, highly likely was a Samaritan refugee bred out even born in Egypt, the masturbation / creation view on his parable of the sower finds a really very interesting background in Egypt theology and mythology:

https://hadithi.africa/the-ancient-egyp ... aculation/

Male masturbation was an even more important image in ancient Egypt: when performed by a god it could be considered a creative or magical act: the god Atum was believed to have created the universe by masturbating to ejaculation, in some other accounts, sneeze. Atum is one of the most important and frequently mentioned deities from earliest times, as evidenced by his prominence in the Pyramid Texts, where he is portrayed as both a creator and father to the king, he created his children—the first deities, out of loneliness.

In the Heliopolitan creation myth, Atum was considered to be the first God, having created himself, sitting on a mound (benben) (or identified with the mound itself), from the primordial waters. Early myths state that Atum created the god Shu and goddess Tefnut by spitting them out of his mouth. To explain how Atum did this, the myth uses the metaphor of masturbation, with the hand he used in this act representing the female principle inherent within him. Other interpretations state that he has made union with his shadow.

Let's take a deeper look at the history of ancient Egypt and the Heliopolitan creation myth according to Egyptian cosmogony: Before there was anything, there was Atum, the creator God and main deity of the Egyptian pantheon, who existed by himself. He was surrounded by nothingness, so he decided to put an end to his long solitude and created the world and the rest of the Egyptian gods through masturbation. From his ejaculation emerged the first pair of twin gods, Shu (air god) and Tefnut (moisture goddess). Atum’s semen was the origin of the world, and masturbation the act of creation.

The ancient Egyptians strong belief that male masturbation was very important and they were strongly convinced that their main source of livelihood had come from Atum’s ejaculation, and it was their duty to keep it alive. Pharaohs would perform a ceremony to thank their main god, which involved masturbating at the riverbank and making sure that the semen followed the flow of the river’s waters. This was seen as a good omen and a sign of the continuing life’s cycle, fertility, and the universal order, which would also follow their own course.

The mound evidently represents a vulva, I think.
With my linking / resembling Thomas to what today is knows as radical non duality - where the subconscious realisation of separation leads to endless Seeking, it is more than striking that the feeling and awareness of loneliness drives the need to creation by masturbation

A process of creation it is indeed, and in Thomas it is meant to be perpetual, hence the permanent hard-on - the carrying of one's sa.ti.rho.os in his way

It is a mix, like Thomas itself, which is rooted in Egypt, with a history in Judea (and likely Samaria), influenced by Hellinism (Dionysus). Aimed at self-salvation and liberation (most importantly from religion) it eventually became twisted and turned into Christianity.
The Greeks would have laughed themselves to hilarious mind boggling deaths by all this humongous dramatic irony - and perhaps so did Thomas

Purposely spelled like this, as it appears in my translation, where Thomas has 102 occurrences of the regular IS, and 3 of these: logion 13, 22 and 90

Hesychii Alexandrinii, 1867: page 1486
Spelled with a capital U, and the silent "h", spiritus asper: he-yes is a likely pronunciation. It is close enough for me, especially since Dionysus, son of Zeus, also got equated with Zeus.
Then again we couldn't possibly expect a spoiler at this point in time, almost 2 millennia afterwards

Once again I will repeat my analysis of the alleged nomina sacra: these must be split in known words and unknown words, and the manner in which each of them gets a superlinear stroke must be carefully administrated, before conclusions can be drawn. The superlinear is more than abundantly present in Coptic, and so is the utter absence of declinations and conjugations, meaning that in principle each of the words now known to us could have existed in only one form in Coptic.
Greek, with its 4 different cases (not counting the vocative) really is a very unfortunate language for creating "abbreviations" like these. And again (and again), IHS and IS can't be counted among those abbreviations unless there is ample attestation to their unabridged version well before the very first appearance of these forms

And there surely isn't anything the like. For all other words there surely is, but not for these

I read this thread once quickly and again more slowly, and there is still a lot I don't get. I'm confused enough I am not sure how to ask for clarification.

I take it that in McDonald's book, there is this quotation: "Carry your satyr in my way - said Dionysius"

I take it that this quotation has something to do with masturbation, perhaps masturbation to ejaculation. This connection is based on connections with Egyptian deities.

I take it that this cultural/religious context had something to do with the formation of GThomas and also with the NT Gospels.

"Sowing seed" could be interpreted as a veiled reference to masturbation to ejaculation in the Egyptian divine creation sense of the word.

Is that correct, so far?

gryan wrote: ↑Sun Jul 04, 2021 10:01 am I read this thread once quickly and again more slowly, and there is still a lot I don't get. I'm confused enough I am not sure how to ask for clarification.

Most understandable, I have jotted down a lot of thoughts. It will take a few days to get everything aligned and in proper order

I take it that in McDonald's book, there is this quotation: "Carry your satyr in my way - said Dionysius"

No, there isn't. MacDonald draws many parallels between Dionysus and John Presbyter, and they are really stunning. But this is a "quote of mine", that is to say, it is how I translate a significant part of logion 55 of Thomas - commonly known as "Carry your cross in my way"

I take it that this quotation has something to do with masturbation, perhaps masturbation to ejaculation. This connection is based on connections with Egyptian deities.

1. There is one single "staurogram" in Thomas, in logion 55 indeed.
2. But it is not a staurogram, none of the Coptic texts that I checked have a staurogram: they use a different letter, the Coptic Ti, one of the Demotic extension that the Copts added to the Greek alphabet.
3. As such, they would pronounce the word ⲥ⳨ⲟⲥ not as s.tau.rho.(o)s, but as s.ti.rho.(o)s. I can't find any word even remotely like that in Coptic, save for ⲥⲁⲧⲉⲉⲣⲉ, the stater (coin).
When I check Greek, again, there is στύραξ (fragrant gum) and στερρός = στερεός, the adjective stiff / strong. σιτηρός is an adjective, of-corn. The only thing that comes close is Σάτυρος.
4. So, with the stirogram in Thomas, it can only say, to the best of my knowledge, having consulted the Coptic dictionary as well as the Greek dictionary, "Carry my satyr".
5. And with the very helpful insights from MacDonald and the undeniable resemblance between Dionysus and significant parts of the Gospel of John, I realised that most else in the NT and Thomas also bears a striking resemblance to Dionysus, with the agricultural themes all over the place, for instance in the parable of the sower, the mustard seed, the vineyard, and so on.
6. And as such, a satyr would be very fitting in the context of Dionysus as well

I take it that this cultural/religious context had something to do with the formation of GThomas and also with the NT Gospels.

I purely focus on Thomas, and that of Thomas which is in the gospels - which is two thirds of all his logia, so basically what you say here applies

"Sowing seed" could be interpreted as a veiled reference to masturbation to ejaculation in the Egyptian divine creation sense of the word.

It is all about interpretation, of course - and likelihood. If you read Thomas just as a text in an Egyptian language, a link to an Egyptian creation myth is far from far-fetched

Is that correct, so far?

Not too bad really, given your confusion. Does this help?

Ok, I think I understand what you have said here. Thanks.

The Discussion on my stirogram paper has launched over at academia.edu - for those interested, https://www.academia.edu/s/c45adf65df

One little letter to be the stumbling block for all of Christianity; I wonder if there is anyone "within the inner circles" who still knows how it all went down, and as a consequence has been holding his breath for the decades since the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library

In related news, I'm collecting all instances of the stirogram from the NHL: 32 occurrences of either cross or crucified, roughly a dozen false positives that translate to either wood or nail, and get translated as the above

https://www.academia.edu/26990847/2016_ ... Dictionary (Kelly Wrenhaven)

probably also a reference to the lesions slaves suffered when flogged, a punishment slaves might also suffer if caught masturbating (e.g., as implied in Aristophanes’ Frogs 542–548).

I have often wondered why Mark barely names the event, even before I learned of the odd use of a Latin loanword for this instrument that has its own unique native word in every language of the world


There it was; I hope you paid attention because the moment is gone already.
The way to read the story around Christianity is to focus on that what is being said, and that what is not being said. Initially it doesn't matter what is being said - all it matters is about what something is being said.
A fine example is John the Baptist: he is such a legend, larger than life, with so many stories and rituals surrounding him. Then read the NT, especially the meagre and flimsy 6 verses that he gets in Mark, and you know that they are filling a suspicious void.
Likewise for the flogging, with the story about the 39 lashes and that being a Roman custom and such. Mark 10:34 is such a hilariously evident interpolation:


Naturally, in Luke this is quite different, as is anything that is reminiscent of Dionysus, as for instance the purple dress and the parody on the Dionysian laurel:


Luke repeats it in verse 23, but the word remains the same as this one, and all of this shows once again why it is useless reading the Bible in English when you're interested in its background. I find it immensely bewildering how people on this forum, many of which are regulars, can quote bible verses in anything else but an interlinear fashion like I do


Children. The irony is dripping off the bottom of the screen here, and this has no resemblance whatsoever with the incredible painful punishment of flogging. At best this is some kind of spanking, but the link with the theme of children - in the NT as well as in Thomas - is blatantly obvious

mlinssen wrote: ↑Mon Jul 05, 2021 1:48 pm The Discussion on my stirogram paper has launched over at academia.edu - for those interested, https://www.academia.edu/s/c45adf65df

One little letter to be the stumbling block for all of Christianity; I wonder if there is anyone "within the inner circles" who still knows how it all went down, and as a consequence has been holding his breath for the decades since the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library

In related news, I'm collecting all instances of the stirogram from the NHL: 32 occurrences of either cross or crucified, roughly a dozen false positives that translate to either wood or nail, and get translated as the above

Summary: I have gone through all of P45, P66 and P75 - and out of the 13 staurograms that Hurtado mentioned, only 8 can be distinguished in the MSS

With 13 stirograms in the Nag Hammadi Library alone, the balance has switched. And the last sentence of Hurtado's conclusion has become more than questionable:

"In the earliest instances of Christian usage, the staurogram (again, whether taken as a pictogram or a numerical symbol) obviously makes reference to the crucifixion/cross of Jesus, and so (along with the abundant textual evidence) reflects an importance given to Jesus’ crucifixion in Christian faith/piety, from at least as early as the late second century."

As usual, all Discussion content will be collected into a separate paper. All hyperlinked to publicly accessible MSS that comprise the full and complete basis to my findings.
But this time my findings have been so very different from the "known facts" that I will also republish my paper, which is highly unusual

But an end must come to the way in which biblical academics present data that can't be verified easily - and it would be a sign of maturity and professionalism if data were verified in the first place, by its authors, peers, or others

mlinssen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 1:57 pm

mlinssen wrote: ↑Mon Jul 05, 2021 1:48 pm The Discussion on my stirogram paper has launched over at academia.edu - for those interested, https://www.academia.edu/s/c45adf65df

One little letter to be the stumbling block for all of Christianity; I wonder if there is anyone "within the inner circles" who still knows how it all went down, and as a consequence has been holding his breath for the decades since the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library

In related news, I'm collecting all instances of the stirogram from the NHL: 32 occurrences of either cross or crucified, roughly a dozen false positives that translate to either wood or nail, and get translated as the above

Summary: I have gone through all of P45, P66 and P75 - and out of the 13 staurograms that Hurtado mentioned, only 8 can be distinguished in the MSS

With 13 stirograms in the Nag Hammadi Library alone, the balance has switched. And the last sentence of Hurtado's conclusion has become more than questionable:

"In the earliest instances of Christian usage, the staurogram (again, whether taken as a pictogram or a numerical symbol) obviously makes reference to the crucifixion/cross of Jesus, and so (along with the abundant textual evidence) reflects an importance given to Jesus’ crucifixion in Christian faith/piety, from at least as early as the late second century."

As usual, all Discussion content will be collected into a separate paper. All hyperlinked to publicly accessible MSS that comprise the full and complete basis to my findings.
But this time my findings have been so very different from the "known facts" that I will also republish my paper, which is highly unusual

But an end must come to the way in which biblical academics present data that can't be verified easily - and it would be a sign of maturity and professionalism if data were verified in the first place, by its authors, peers, or others

A quote from Peter, regarding another claim by Hurtado:

Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2015 11:11 pm The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins By Larry W. Hurtado
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=w5 ... 22&f=false

P.116

• In none of the other nomina sacra forms (other than IH), however, does the numerical value of the letter combinations appear to have been significant.

I like Hurtado enough, and I want to trust him on this, but in all things regarding this subject, as I'm sure you must agree, it is better to verify. But by verify I do not simply mean find a quote. Generally, I mean verify, on your own. It's hard work, but it is necessary. It's especially necessary for negative claims (like the above), which are much more likely to contain scholarly error than positive ones.

In Hurtado's case, positive claims also are likely to contain errors, and grave ones at that. Here is what I have so far, and it is legible and verifiable although not suited for publication in this exact form yet.
First, a list from all of the NT for all occurrences of cross and crucify:

Below is a complete list of all of the NT for the words 'cross' and 'crucif'. It is based on Berean Literal, and footnote references have been left intact, e.g. "voicesb" in Luke 23:23.
Please do note the only false positive in Acts 2:23!
All in all, 75 verses. 28 occurrences of the word 'cross', and 53 occurrences of any form of the verb 'to crucify' - and all these include the one false positive of Acts 2:23, a verb, so the official "stauro-count" is 74 verses, 28 times "cross"and 52 times "crucif-"

mlinssen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 1:57 pm

mlinssen wrote: ↑Mon Jul 05, 2021 1:48 pm The Discussion on my stirogram paper has launched over at academia.edu - for those interested, https://www.academia.edu/s/c45adf65df

One little letter to be the stumbling block for all of Christianity; I wonder if there is anyone "within the inner circles" who still knows how it all went down, and as a consequence has been holding his breath for the decades since the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library

In related news, I'm collecting all instances of the stirogram from the NHL: 32 occurrences of either cross or crucified, roughly a dozen false positives that translate to either wood or nail, and get translated as the above

Summary: I have gone through all of P45, P66 and P75 - and out of the 13 staurograms that Hurtado mentioned, only 8 can be distinguished in the MSS

With 13 stirograms in the Nag Hammadi Library alone, the balance has switched. And the last sentence of Hurtado's conclusion has become more than questionable:

"In the earliest instances of Christian usage, the staurogram (again, whether taken as a pictogram or a numerical symbol) obviously makes reference to the crucifixion/cross of Jesus, and so (along with the abundant textual evidence) reflects an importance given to Jesus’ crucifixion in Christian faith/piety, from at least as early as the late second century."

As usual, all Discussion content will be collected into a separate paper. All hyperlinked to publicly accessible MSS that comprise the full and complete basis to my findings.
But this time my findings have been so very different from the "known facts" that I will also republish my paper, which is highly unusual

But an end must come to the way in which biblical academics present data that can't be verified easily - and it would be a sign of maturity and professionalism if data were verified in the first place, by its authors, peers, or others

Here is something that everyone can verify within a few minutes, free of charge:

P45

https://manuscripts.csntm.org/manuscript/View/GA_P45
CSNTM Image Id: 139779
CSNTM Image Name: P45_001-002a_k2.jpg

A direct link is not provided, but when you click "Switch to new viewer" there is a description to each fragment; Matthew 25.41 is the one to get, and the small version of that looks like this:

https://images.csntm.org/IIIFServer.ash ... native.jpg

Matthew 26:1-3:

1 Καὶ (And) ἐγένετο (it came to pass), ὅτε (when) ἐτέλεσεν (had finished) ὁ (-) Ἰησοῦς (Jesus) πάντας (all) τοὺς (the) λόγους (words) τούτους (these), εἶπεν (He said) τοῖς (to the) μαθηταῖς (disciples) αὐτοῦ (of Him), 2 “Οἴδατε (You know) ὅτι (that) μετὰ (after) δύο (two) ἡμέρας (days) τὸ (the) πάσχα (Passover) γίνεται (takes place), καὶ (and) ὁ (the) Υἱὸς (Son) τοῦ (-) ἀνθρώπου (of Man) παραδίδοται (is delivered) εἰς (over) τὸ (-) σταυρωθῆναι (to be crucified).” 3 Τότε (Then) συνήχθησαν (were gathered together) οἱ (the) ἀρχιερεῖς (chief priests) ...

Halfway the fragment, Matthew 26:1 starts, and these are the letters that are visible:
Καὶ ἐγένετο
ῖς μαθητα
ς τοῦ
ιερεῖς

I couldn't possibly find the relevant part with the stauros, although I am quite unfamiliar with reading (badly damaged) manuscripts. And Hurtado knew that this is a lacuna:

(https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2015 ... m-and-p45/)

"Roth makes a cogent case that, contrary to some previous reports, there are at least two instances of the staurogram in P45: one at Matt. 26:2 (in the single leaf of P45 held in Vienna) and another at Luke 14:27 (in the leaves of P45 held in the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin). Each of these is part of a “nomina sacra” form of the Greek words for “crucify” and “cross”."

One doesn't need to make a case for something that is visible, be that an allegedly cogent case or not. I couldn't possibly locate anything after Luke 14:10 at CSNTM, and given my experience with Hurtado I will leave it just at that. I know he couldn't possibly respond to this, but maybe I will have a look at what Roth has - or maybe not

P66

Again, Interlinear is Berean, and I use CSNTM as the main site but they don't provide direct links, so I use the Swiss site bodmerlab for that.
Consult my earlier post for all the 74 occurrences of 'cross' and 'crucif' in all of the NT: viewtopic.php?p=124941#p124941

1)

https://manuscripts.csntm.org/manuscrip ... r?filter=1
CSNTM Image Id: 603444
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_138.jpg

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=138

5 ἐξῆλθεν (Went forth) οὖν (therefore) ὁ (-) Ἰησοῦς (Jesus) ἔξω (outside), φορῶν (wearing) τὸν (the) ἀκάνθινον (thorny) στέφανον (crown) καὶ (and) τὸ (the) πορφυροῦν (purple) ἱμάτιον (robe). καὶ (And) λέγει (he says) αὐτοῖς (to them), “Ἰδοὺ (Behold) ὁ (the) ἄνθρωπος (man)!”
6 Ὅτε (When) οὖν (therefore) εἶδον (saw) αὐτὸν (Him) οἱ (the) ἀρχιερεῖς (chief priests) καὶ (and) οἱ (the) ὑπηρέται (officers), ἐκραύγασαν (they cried out) λέγοντες (saying), “Σταύρωσον (Crucify)! σταύρωσον (Crucify)!” Λέγει (Says) αὐτοῖς (to them) ὁ (-) Πιλᾶτος (Pilate), “Λάβετε (Take) αὐτὸν (Him) ὑμεῖς (yourselves) καὶ (and) σταυρώσατε (crucify Him); ἐγὼ (I) γὰρ (for) οὐχ (no) εὑρίσκω (find) ἐν (in) αὐτῷ (Him) αἰτίαν (guilt).”

Bottom 4 lines:

στέφανον κα
ν? Ὅτε οὖν ε
οἱ ἀρ ... ???
κ ... Λέγει

One could guess a staurogram here, but it is a lacuna, and nothing of it is visible. With the best (or worst) of intentions anything could be likely, reasonable or plausible here, but nothing will ever be proven - so I decline, on both possible instances of a staurogram. It seems that the scribe made a correction above the beginning of the word LEGEI, where ON seems to be visible

The last part of verse 6 is on a different papyrus:

https://manuscripts.csntm.org/manuscrip ... r?filter=1
CSNTM Image Id: 603445
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_139.jpg

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=139

A partial lacuna is shown at the top right, where a staurogram is likely to be, given the superlinear stroke and something that looks like the top of the Rho. But it's a lacuna, and not unambiguous - far from it, really. I will decline, as opinions about what would have been written here will always differ

2)

https://manuscripts.csntm.org/manuscrip ... r?filter=1
CSNTM Image Id: 603445
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_139.jpg

10 Λέγει (Says) οὖν (therefore) αὐτῷ (to Him) ὁ (-) Πιλᾶτος (Pilate), “Ἐμοὶ (To me) οὐ (not) λαλεῖς (speak You)? οὐκ (Not) οἶδας (know You) ὅτι (that) ἐξουσίαν (authority) ἔχω (I have) ἀπολῦσαί (to release) σε (You), καὶ (and) ἐξουσίαν (authority) ἔχω (I have) σταυρῶσαί (to crucify) σε (You)?”
11 Ἀπεκρίθη (Answered) ‹αὐτῷ› (him) Ἰησοῦς (Jesus), “Οὐκ (Not) εἶχες (you would have) ἐξουσίαν (authority) κατ’ (also) ἐμοῦ (Me) οὐδεμίαν (against), εἰ (if) μὴ (not) ἦν (it were) δεδομένον (given) σοι (to you) ἄνωθεν (from above). διὰ (Because of) τοῦτο (this), ὁ (the one) παραδούς (having delivered up) μέ (Me) σοι (to you), μείζονα (greater) ἁμαρτίαν (sin) ἔχει has).”

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=139

Consider line 6 from the bottom of the fragment:

οὐκ οἶδας ὅτι ἐ
σαί σε καὶ
αίσ ... αί Ἀπε !!! This is quite different from what the verse has
ουσίαν κατ

It would seem that the MS doesn't say ἔχω (I have) σταυρῶσαί (to crucify) σε (You), but something like ἔχω (I have) σταυρῶσαί (to crucify) - I can't reconstruct this with the MS on one side and the verse on the other

3)

CSNTM Image Id: 603446
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_140.jpg

13 Ὁ (-) οὖν (Therefore) Πιλᾶτος (Pilate), ἀκούσας (having heard) τῶν (the) λόγων (words) τούτων (these), ἤγαγεν (brought) ἔξω (out) τὸν (-) Ἰησοῦν (Jesus), καὶ (and) ἐκάθισεν (sat down) ἐπὶ (upon) βήματος (the judgment seat) εἰς (at) τόπον (a place) λεγόμενον (called) Λιθόστρωτον (the Stone Pavement); Ἑβραϊστὶ (in Hebrew) δὲ (now), Γαββαθα (Gabbatha).
14 ἦν (It was) δὲ (now) Παρασκευὴ (the Day of Preparation) τοῦ (of the) πάσχα (Passover); ὥρα (the hour) ἦν (was) ὡς (about) ἕκτη (the sixth). καὶ (And) λέγει (he says) τοῖς (to the) Ἰουδαίοις (Jews), “Ἴδε (Behold) ὁ (the) Βασιλεὺς (king) ὑμῶν (of you)!”
15 Ἐκραύγασαν (They cried out) οὖν (therefore), “Ἐκεῖνοι (With Him) Ἆρον (away), ἆρον (away)! σταύρωσον (Crucify) αὐτόν (Him)!” Λέγει (Says) αὐτοῖς (to them) ὁ (-) Πιλᾶτος (Pilate), “Τὸν (The) Βασιλέα (King) ὑμῶν (of you) σταυρώσω (shall I crucify)?”

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=140

τον Ἑβραϊστὶ δὲ
α ἦν δὲ Παρα
ὥρα ἦν ὡς ἕκτη κ
ίοις “Ἴδ ... α
αύγασαν ἆρον !!! σ
σstaurogram

The beginning S, followed by the start of an unambiguous staurogram.
Do note that the MS has ἆρον only once, not twice - that, on a side note.
Below that line, another staurogram, preceded by the

4a)

CSNTM Image Id: 603447
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_141.jpg

Ἀπεκρίθησαν (Answered) οἱ (the) ἀρχιερεῖς (chief priests), “Οὐκ (Not) ἔχομεν (we have) βασιλέα (a king), εἰ (if) μὴ (not) Καίσαρα (Caesar).”
16 Τότε (Then) οὖν (therefore) παρέδωκεν (he delivered) αὐτὸν (Him) αὐτοῖς (to them), ἵνα (that) σταυρωθῇ (He might be crucified). Παρέλαβον (They took) οὖν (therefore) τὸν (-) Ἰησοῦν (Jesus).

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=141

Top left fragment:

ασιλέα εἰ μὴ Κ
ρέδωκεν
στ[αυρω]θῇ

A clear staurogram, where the tau and the rho make up for the sounds that are not written in the verb

4b)

17 Καὶ (And) βαστάζων (bearing) ἑαυτῷ (His own) τὸν (-) σταυρὸν (cross), ἐξῆλθεν (He went out) εἰς (to) τὸν (the) λεγόμενον (called) Κρανίου (of the Skull) τόπον (Place), ὃ (which) λέγεται (is called) Ἑβραϊστὶ (in Hebrew) Γολγοθᾶ (Golgotha),
18 ὅπου (where) αὐτὸν (Him) ἐσταύρωσαν (they crucified), καὶ (and) μετ’ (with) αὐτοῦ (Him) ἄλλους (others) δύο (two), ἐντεῦθεν (on this side) καὶ (and) ἐντεῦθεν (on that side), μέσον (in between) δὲ (now) τὸν (-) Ἰησοῦν (Jesus).

Large bottom right fragment, starting at its line 1:

αυτῷ ... ν εἰς τὸ???ν λ
μεν ... ον ὃ λέγεται Ἑβρα
που αὐτὸν [ἐ]στ[αύρωσ]αν, κ

A lacuna for the first stauron in verse 17.
Then a clear staurogram for verse 18, where the tau and the rho (and an invisible S) make up for the sounds that are not written in the verb

4c)

Next lines on the MS:

ους δύο ἐντεῦθεν
έσον δὲ τὸν Ἰ

19 Ἔγραψεν (Wrote) δὲ (then) καὶ (also) τίτλον (a title) ὁ (-) Πιλᾶτος (Pilate) καὶ (and) ἔθηκεν (put it) ἐπὶ (on) τοῦ (the) σταυροῦ (cross). ἦν (It was) δὲ (now) γεγραμμένον (written): ΙΗΣΟΥΣ (JESUS) Ο* (OF) ΝΑΖΩΡΑΙΟΣ (NAZARETH), Ο* (THE) ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ (KING) ΤΩΝ (OF THE) ΙΟΥΔΑΙΩΝ (JEWS).
20 Τοῦτον (This) οὖν (therefore) τὸν (the) τίτλον (title) πολλοὶ (many) ἀνέγνωσαν (read) τῶν (of the) Ἰουδαίων (Jews), ὅτι (for) ἐγγὺς (near) ἦν (was) ὁ (the) τόπος (place), τῆς (the) πόλεως (city), ὅπου (where) ἐσταυρώθη (was crucified) ὁ (-) Ἰησοῦς (Jesus), καὶ (and) ἦν (it was) γεγραμμένον (written) Ἑβραϊστί (in Hebrew), Ῥωμαϊστί (in Latin), Ἑλληνιστί (in Greek).

Next lines on the MS are from the start of verse 19:

δὲ κ ... λον ὁ Π
θηκεν ... οῦ στ[αυρ]οῦ

A clear staurogram, where the tau and the rho make up for the sounds that are not written in the noun

The fragment ends with the three last lines, verse 20:

ῶν Ἰουδαίων ὅτι
ος τ(ῆ)ς
ηνιστ

The staurogram could only be in between that first and third line, but there is a lacuna. Again, I must decline

5)

CSNTM Image Id: 603448
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_142.jpg

21 ἔλεγον (Were saying) οὖν (therefore) τῷ (-) Πιλάτῳ (to Pilate) οἱ (the) ἀρχιερεῖς (chief priests) τῶν (of the) Ἰουδαίων (Jews), “Μὴ (Not) γράφε (write), ‘Ὁ (The) Βασιλεὺς (King) τῶν (of the) Ἰουδαίων (Jews),’ ἀλλ’ (but) ὅτι (that) ἐκεῖνος (He) εἶπεν (said), ‘Βασιλεύς (King) εἰμι (I am) ⇔ «τῶν (of the) Ἰουδαίων» (Jews).’”
22 Ἀπεκρίθη (Answered) ὁ (-) Πιλᾶτος (Pilate), “Ὃ (What) γέγραφα (I have written), γέγραφα (I have written).”

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=142

The fragment starts with the top right:

ιλάτῳ οἱ ἀρχ
ων Μὴ γρά
ν ἀλ
instead of εἶπεν it says LEGEI !
ίθη
αφα

It then continues:

23 Οἱ (The) οὖν (then) στρατιῶται (soldiers), ὅτε (when) ἐσταύρωσαν (they crucified) τὸν (-) Ἰησοῦν (Jesus), ἔλαβον (took) τὰ (the) ἱμάτια (garments) αὐτοῦ (of Him) καὶ (and) ἐποίησαν (made) τέσσαρα (four) μέρη (parts), ἑκάστῳ (to each) στρατιώτῃ (soldier) μέρος (a part), καὶ (and also) τὸν (the) χιτῶνα (tunic). ἦν (Was) δὲ (now) ὁ (the) χιτὼν (tunic) ἄραφος (seamless), ἐκ (from) τῶν (the) ἄνωθεν (top) ὑφαντὸς (woven) δι’ (throughout) ὅλου (all).

Οἱ οὖν στρατιῶ ... σταύρ

Not a staurogram this time, the top of STAUR is just legible, and the next line continues with the remainder of the word:

σαν τὸν Ἰ[ησοῦ]ν

6)

The next occurrence is in verse 25:

CSNTM Image Id: 603449
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_143.jpg

25 Εἱστήκεισαν (Had been standing) δὲ (now) παρὰ (by) τῷ (the) σταυρῷ (cross) τοῦ (-) Ἰησοῦ (of Jesus) ἡ (the) μήτηρ (mother) αὐτοῦ (of Him), καὶ (and) ἡ (the) ἀδελφὴ (sister) τῆς (of the) μητρὸς (mother) αὐτοῦ (of Him), Μαρία (Mary) ἡ (the wife) τοῦ (-) Κλωπᾶ (of Clopas), καὶ (and) Μαρία (Mary) ἡ (-) Μαγδαληνή (Magdalene).

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=143

The third line has the start of verse 25 at the end:

αν δ
αρὰ τ ... ήτηρ

and the possible stauros sits in the lacuna - I decline again.
Three more verses in John: 31, 32 and 41

7)

CSNTM Image Id: 603450
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_144.jpg

31 Οἱ (-) οὖν (Therefore) Ἰουδαῖοι (the Jews), ἐπεὶ (because) Παρασκευὴ (the Preparation) ἦν (it was), ἵνα (so that) μὴ (not) μείνῃ (would remain) ἐπὶ (on) τοῦ (the) σταυροῦ (cross) τὰ (the) σώματα (bodies) ἐν (on) τῷ (the) σαββάτῳ (Sabbath)— ἦν (was) γὰρ (for) μεγάλη (a high) ἡ (-) ἡμέρα (day) ἐκείνου (that) τοῦ (-) σαββάτου (Sabbath)— ἠρώτησαν (asked) τὸν (-) Πιλᾶτον (Pilate) ἵνα (that) κατεαγῶσιν (might be broken) αὐτῶν (their) τὰ (-) σκέλη (legs), καὶ (and) ἀρθῶσιν (they might be taken away).

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=144

The middle fragment is conveniently in black and white, and the third line has the staurogram:

σ[ταυρ]οῦ τὰ σώ

32 ἦλθον (Came) οὖν (therefore) οἱ (the) στρατιῶται (soldiers), καὶ (and) τοῦ (of the) μὲν (indeed) πρώτου (first) κατέαξαν (broke) τὰ (the) σκέλη (legs), καὶ (and) τοῦ (of the) ἄλλου (other) τοῦ (-) συσταυρωθέντος (having been crucified with) αὐτῷ (Him);

The bottom last line of the same black-and-whit middle fragment starts verse 32:

ται καὶ τοῦ μὲν (π)ρ
ν τὰ σ ... κ
συνσ

The word in the text starts with συνσ(ταυρωθέντος), not συσ(ταυρωθέντος) - but again the possible staurogram sits in the lacuna - and again I must decline

8)

The very last occurrence is in verse 41:

CSNTM Image Id: 603452
Location: Foundation Martin Bodmer at Université de Genève in Geneva, Switzerland
CSNTM Image Name: P66_146.jpg

41 Ἦν (There was) δὲ (now) ἐν (in) τῷ (the) τόπῳ (place) ὅπου (where) ἐσταυρώθη (He was crucified) κῆπος (a garden), καὶ (and) ἐν (in) τῷ (the) κήπῳ (garden) μνημεῖον (a tomb) καινόν (new), ἐν (in) ᾧ (which) οὐδέπω (not yet) οὐδεὶς (no one) ἦν (was) τεθειμένος (laid).

Pleasant URL: https://bodmerlab.unige.ch/fr/constella ... 7?page=146

Starting at the smallest bottom left fragment, verse 41 can be found:

τό(π)ῳ ὅπου ... θη

The word in between could be a staurogram but there would be a lot of space left, and ἐσταυρ would neatly fit into the lacuna

That concludes John and all occurrences of 'cross' and 'crucif', and that concludes my search in the 3 MSS that Hurtado mentions: P45, P66 and P75.

What is the total score?

John 19:6 - a lacuna for both possible instances, and a partially visible third occurrence (not counted)
John 19:10 - a lacuna, and the MS deviates from the bible verse
John 19:15 - the S, followed by an unambiguous staurogram - and another s-staurogram right below that line
John 19:16 - an unambiguous staurogram
John 19:17 - a lacuna
John 19:18 - an unambiguous staurogram
John 19:19 - an unambiguous staurogram
John 19:20 - a lacuna
John 19:23 - not a staurogram, just the full word
John 19:25 - a lacuna
John 19:31 - an unambiguous staurogram
John 19:32 - a lacuna
John 19:41 - a lacuna that is more likely to contain the full word than a staurogram

6 total instances, where Hurtado had 10

P75

Luke 9:23: https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Pap.Han ... ter.Verbi)

1A.11r, line 8 from the top, shows the staurogram

With the Rho directly above it in line 7, it appears that this one was formed by simply writing a Rho and placing a horizontal bar at the bottom of the loop, and as such it looks very similar to the stirogram, even though the Rho is slightly elevated This one looks very different from the one in Luke 14:27

Luke 14:27:
https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Pap.Han ... ter.Verbi)

1B.10r, line 4 from the top, shows the staurogram

A clear Tau with a Rho on top of it

Luke 24:7: https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Pap.Han ... ter.Verbi)

2A.6v, line 19 from the bottom, shows the staurogram - it is the line right below the missing papyrus piece to the right

This staurogram seems like a combination of the other two, but yet again the horizontal bar is slightly below the top letter line, and it resembles a stirogram rather than a staurogram, like the one in Luke 9:23 does

Three different ligatures, it would seem that the scribe wasn't used to writing them

@@@@@@@@@@

That concludes the search. Out of the 13 claimed by Hurtado, only 9 are visible - but you be the judge of that