Silver amulet is the oldest evidence of Christianity north of the Alps

https://archaeologymag.com/2024/12/oldest-evidence-of-christianity-north-of-the-alps/

by secretmark • 2 years ago

270 290 2 years ago

Fascinating from both a technological and theological/ecclesiological perspective. I'll be sure to pass this on to some of my faith-filled friends who now live south of the Alps but have roots in the same region.

inhumation burials — a practice uncommon in other Roman cemeteries in Frankfurt

To save others looking it up: "inhumation burial" seems to be a technical term in the field for what we simply call "burial", i.e. digging a grave and then covering the person with dirt and/or rocks. I'm not an expert, but given that this became the primary method of disposal in Christian culture (and still is, in many traditions who believe that cremation prevents the body being resurrected), one could infer that this is an indicator of Here Be Christians.

If you know even a smidgeon of theology, it's not technically possible to define (mainstream) Christian faith without any reference to Jewish beliefs. Jesus was, of course, himself raised a Jew, as were both Saints Peter & Paul, although the latter was also a Roman citizen who wrote in Greek, and they famously quarrelled quite a bit about how much of Judaism should be incorporated into the new religion, well documented in the New Testament itself and plenty of extra-biblical evidence.

It does seem a reasonable claim that nothing in this text contains elements of Judaism that were not already or subsequently incorporated into what became Christianity (though I'm pretty sure at this point it didn't yet have a name other than "The Way". I could be wrong there.)

However, just for fun:

- "Holy Holy Holy" is most definitely a reference to the (Hebrew) book of Isaiah, which was also quoted in the (Christian) book of Revelation aka Apocalypse (Greek, New Testament)

- Of course they don't use the name Yahweh when talking about the God/Lord of the World, of whom Jesus is claimed to be the Son. Neither does the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, produced for use by Greek-speaking Jews a few hundred years before Christ). But they are most definitely talking about the same God.

- I'm not sure if this pre- or post- dates the Jewish tradition of replacing the Name with "Adonai" (Hebrew for "Lord") or its Greek/Latin equivalent, on the grounds that the Name itself is too holy to be spoken or to risk being destroyed if the manuscript gets damaged or, you know, buried in the ground to decay with a dead person. But that could also be a factor.

Unfortunately they don't provide a transcription of the Latin text into modern characters so there's no opportunity right now to go nuts on that but it would be interesting to see what specific Latin words were used compared with translations of the Septuagint, and the original Greek and Hebrew texts themselves.

Still, thanks for posting!

mytailorisrich• 2 years ago

Some of the latin text is on the Wikipedia page [1]. Hopefully it will be updated to include more.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_silver_inscription

vitus2• 2 years ago

One of the references on the wikipedia page seems to have a full transcription (along with German translation):

https://archaeologisches-museum-frankfurt.de/index.php/de/?v...

I personally cannot make heads or tails of the script used in the various images, but it seems about right.

(Note that V and U are generally used interchangeably in Latin, since they were the same character. Same with I / J.)

bdcravens2• 2 years ago

My wife is Messianic Jewish, where the primary intent is to restore Jewish traditions and beliefs while still believing in Jesus/Yeshua ("Jesus" being essentially a mispronunciation; the westernized version of the name would more accurately be "Joshua"). Personally my beliefs lie elsewhere, but it's still unfortunate that "denomination" is still such a tiny minority, given its desire to be a purer form of the religion.

andrepd• 2 years ago

Every religion thinks they're the "purer" form of religion though, don't they? x)

joshdata3• 2 years ago

The unfortunate part is where Christians try to pass themselves off as Jews by adding "Jewish" to the name of their denomination. I wish my great aunts and uncles could have added "Christian" to their denomination to escape being murdered in the Holocaust, that would have been nice.

galangalalgol2• 2 years ago

Isn't it Yesu, the diminutive, so Josh? "Josh is the name above all names", sounds kind of odd though.

lucozade3• 2 years ago

"Jesus" being essentially a mispronunciation

Warning! Unnecessary nit-picking incoming...

Jesus isn't a mispronunciation of Yeshua, it's a transliteration. Initially the Hebrew/Aramaic ישוע was transliterated to the Greek Ἰησοῦς which is essentially a phonetic transliteration with the ending changed to the Greek masculine singular.

That was then transliterated to the Latin Iesus with basically the same deal ie phonetic with an ending change.

And that morphed into Jesus, probably about the 16th century, when the swash 'I' became a 'j' sound.

more accurately be "Joshua"

It wouldn't really be more accurate; it would just be a transliteration through a different route. The most that can be said is that there are fewer hops.

It would still likely have most of the sounds wrong, esp if Jesus' name was originally pronounced in Galilean Aramaic. As I understand it that wouldn't have pronounced the final 'a' like an 'a' but more like a glottal stop. But that's right on the edge of my knowledge so I could have made the last bit up.

abrenuntio7• 2 years ago

Don’t confuse culture and gradual inculturation with purity of religion and validity of liturgy.

In the age of the Messiah the faithful are truly drawn “from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages”. If your wife would go to any (decent) Catholic or Orthodox church, and learns to "read" the building and the liturgy of Holy Mass, maybe she could recognize the contours of the “pure” or “more Jewish" religion she is yearning for. She could go to modern or more traditional Latin/Greek/Ukrainian/Syriac/Ethiopian/... rites and in the plurality of all those different cultures and temperaments recognize over and over again the exact same elements and basic plan, organically evolved yet meticulously preserved in a chain of unbroken sacramental obedience.

Entering the church building she’d gradually walk from the holy water near the entrance, through the “outer courtyard” for the lay people, to the sanctuary with the sacrificial altar, golden vessels and incense, elevated and separated by altar rail or curtain. Behind is the tabernacle, the Holy of Holies containing the Real Presence, indicated by a lit candle. And if she was to e.g. carefully analyse the words of the Eucharistic prayers in all these different rites and languages, she would find over and over again the same underlying structure, complete with the Haggadah.

But language and cultural differences aside, there must be fundamental differences as well. It is Christ Himself who took the prescribed liturgy of the ancient Passover meal and gave it its full and final meaning by substituting Himself, in the presence of the apostles, for the merely symbolic lamb. It is through Christ that the Trinity is fully revealed.

How then could e.g. the exact same holidays have been retained? For instance, why would you celebrate Shavuot, if with Pentecost the Holy Spirit directly descended on the Church? Another example: the Lord's Day is not "Sabbath on the wrong day". Sabbath laws do not apply to those under the New Covenant. Beyond the most excellent idea of dedicating an entire day to the Lord with plenty of obligatory prayer, rest, food and family/community time, the Christian Sunday is simply not the Sabbath. On Sunday we celebrate the Resurrection, which occurred on the first day of a new week (the supernatural "eighth day", beyond the natural fullness of the old week).

The priest in this age is also no longer a Levite. To properly offer this sacrifice, he is now sacramentally ordained by proper religious authorities “in the Order of Melchizedek”, reminiscent of the royal priesthood of David and the priesthood of Adam and the firstborns. And where the old liturgy was a sign of divine grace, the liturgy of our age is an effective cause of divine grace. If the priest obeys the liturgy that has been prescribed for his own rite and his own day, no amount of personal corruption can take away the sanctity of his work. This also means that there is no fundamental need for wars in the Holy Land or for "conquering" the Temple Mount by force. The Temple is already being built. Every time the faithful, after having been sacramentally cleansed of mortal sin through baptism or confession, participate in the Lord’s sacrifice by eating the body and drinking the blood of the Lamb, they themselves will inevitably become more and more the dwelling place of the Lord within the material creation.

throaway25014• 2 years ago

Messianic Judaism is usually seen as a corruptive and corruptED force. Israel bans Messianic Jews from being citizens.

joshuamcginnis2• 2 years ago

I have a lot of respect for Messianic Jews; they're struggle is real. I wish more Jews knew just how Jewish the story of Jesus actually is. As far as Christians are concerned, Jesus is the fulfillment of the messianic prophecies in the old testament. Jesus said, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill." (Matthew 5:18)

That said, there is arguably no simpler or purer form of Christianity than simply having faith in and a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

vouaobrasil• 2 years ago

and they famously quarrelled quite a bit about how much of Judaism should be incorporated into the new religion, well documented in the New Testament itself and plenty of extra-biblical evidence.

Just wondering what is the "plenty of extra-biblical evidence"?

FearNotDaniel12• 2 years ago

Good point, I didn’t fact check that part, I probably mixed up hazy memories of some other incidents I read about in the Didache and other early church writings. Wikipedia says there’s no evidence outside of Luke’s and Paul’s own words (Acts and Galatians respectively) and since Luke was hanging out with Paul for a lot of that time (see all the times Acts switches between “he” and “we”) we could be skating on thin ice as far as actual textual evidence goes. Good spot, thanks for calling me out.

hoseja• 2 years ago

Inhumation isn't exclusively christian where did you even come up with that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9An%C4%9Btice_culture#Buri...

FearNotDaniel12• 2 years ago

Didn’t come up with it, didn’t claim it. Where did you come up with the idea that I said it was exclusive to Christianity?

markovs_gun7• 2 years ago

I'm not sure if this pre- or post- dates the Jewish tradition of replacing the Name with "Adonai" (Hebrew for "Lord") or its Greek/Latin equivalent,

That taboo already existed even before the New Testament was written. The Septuagint, an early Greek translation of the Old Testament, was written around 260 BC and uses this convention, translating the Lord's name as "kyrios"- "Lord." The authors of the New Testament itself extensively quote this translation, and firmly established this convention within Christianity as well, especially because most Christian converts wouldn't know Hebrew or be expected to learn Hebrew to hear (remember that literacy rates were very low in this era compared to now) Jewish scriptures in their own languages.

Speaking of literacy, I notice that the Latin of this inscription is very messy. I don't know much Latin myself, but the handwriting is terrible, to the point where I wonder if the maker of this scroll was only semi-literate.

FearNotDaniel12• 2 years ago

only semi-literate

Seems very possible when you consider that this is before the Roman Aristocracy decided to muscle in on the action and take over the church. Many of the original disciples and apostles were semi-literate working class types from the north country (see “nothing good could ever come from Nazareth”) and Paul, the one who wrote the most (but even then likely dictated a lot of it) was a late addition to the team. Sure he recruited a bunch of possibly “middle class” tradesmen and business owners to set up churches in their homes (Priscilla and Aquila, famously) but it was still mostly an underground movement among the slave and worker classes before Constantine decided he could put it to his own use.

af78• 2 years ago

I notice that the Latin of this inscription is very messy

To a modern eye (like mine), other examples of Roman cursive look hard to read as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_cursive

HarHarVeryFunny2• 2 years ago

"Holy Holy Holy" is most definitely a reference to the (Hebrew) book of Isaiah, which was also quoted in the (Christian) book of Revelation aka Apocalypse (Greek, New Testament)

Could you expand on that? Is there any specific reference to the book of Isaiah, and is "holy" (AGIOS in the Latin of the scroll) a good translation of the Hebrew word?

markovs_gun7• 2 years ago

Agios- direct transliteration from the Greek "'άγιος" which is the exact term used in Isaiah 6:3 in the popular Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint. If not a "good" translation, it's certainly an old one, being the word Christians and Jews in that part of the world would have been familiar with in the Book of Isaiah for hundreds of years before this amulet was made.

HarHarVeryFunny2• 2 years ago

the Jewish tradition of replacing the Name with "Adonai" (Hebrew for "Lord") or its Greek/Latin equivalent

Perhaps, but in this Latin inscription we have Jesus being referred to as "IHS XP" - a Greek(!) abbreviation of Jesus Christ, so not avoiding his name altogether.

Oarch• 2 years ago

I'll never be able to read about us digitally unrolling fragile scrolls without it seemingly like otherworldly sci-fi technology.

The translated blessing text itself seems almost modern. Funny to see how little we've changed in some ways.

FearNotDaniel12• 2 years ago

Speaking as a participant in a number of somewhat "modern" Christian traditions, I think one factor is that we have changed quite a lot and then some strands of the faith have decided to go back into the past and seek what we lost from the early days. One example being certain rock'n'roll churches where people stick their hands up in the air while singing and praying: I heard one pastor defend this as being "this is not a new form of prayer, this is what Jewish people were doing hundreds/thousands of years ago and now we're bringing it back". (See the rather-ancient Book of Exodus, for example. No electric guitars or drum kits there[0], but Moses is definitely described as holding his hands up in prayer, sometimes with the help of Joshua when his arms got tired).

[0] though I'm afraid to admit there is at least one actual tambourine...

wil421• 2 years ago

What about the rattle snake churches?

Cthulhu_3• 2 years ago

Thing is, Christianity is (should be? idk) based on the teachings of Jesus which separated from Judaism; on prayer and worship, the New Testament has teachings like:

Matthew 6:5-14 5 “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

That is, he teaches a humble, private, and not-showy way of praying, as opposed to the Jews of their time. But this is causing tension and schisms in Christian churches everywhere. I grew up in a fairly conservative one - grey suits, quiet / low energy services, nothing too outlandish. But family of mine ended up in more Evangelical churches, with live music and the like. Then there's Catholics where opulence and grandeur is apparent in their cathedrals, and while I can appreciate them for their architecture and atmosphere and the like, I don't think that's in line with Jesus' teachings of humility and helping the poor etc, especially not given how much money goes and went around in the church.

bjourne• 2 years ago

That's because Yahweh was a sky god and lived high up in the clouds. So raising your hands, standing on mountain tops, etc, reduces your distance to him. Raising your hands while praying doesn't make as much sense anymore since Heaven is a metaphysical concept and not a place in the skies.

wahern• 2 years ago

I believe what you're describing is "orans": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orans

bdcravens2• 2 years ago

Isn't any translation a product of the language norms of the translator, as opposed to a pure translation?

I know when I read Spanish, I have to mentally convert the order of words to what makes sense in English (for example, "Thanksgiving" in Spanish would be "Day of Action of Thanks" if translated directly).

markovs_gun7• 2 years ago

Yes, with the caveat that with religious texts there are certain conventions that get conserved even across languages. For example, The Book of John starts off "In the beginning, there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." However, the term being translated here as "Word" (λόγος- logos) could easily be translated a number of different ways, and the technically literal meaning of "word" was already falling out of favor by the time John was written. The word could be "Logic" or "reason" or "The underlying principle that governs the order of the universe" but early Latin translators chose to translate this term as "Verbe" and so future translations followed suit.

This is just one example. There are other instances where a word is a loanword from Greek or Latin because it is an early technical term. For example "sanctification" is taken directly from a Latin technical term that is translated that way because of how early Latin translators chose to translate the Greek.

rrr_oh_man• 2 years ago

Maybe our timescale of what is 'modern' is not so modern at all.

woadwarrior01• 2 years ago

There's very similar, but perhaps much more challenging project for digitally unrolling the Herculaneum papyri[1], which is set up as an open machine learning competition[2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herculaneum_papyri

[2] https://scrollprize.org/

ben1040• 2 years ago

I'll never be able to read about us digitally unrolling fragile scrolls without it seemingly like otherworldly sci-fi technology.

I similarly had my mind blown reading an article last week, about how sports & game card collectors are now having their packs CT scanned so they can identify what cards are inside (and the value of the pack) while keeping them sealed.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5987857/2024/12/12/trading-...

pergadad• 2 years ago

Looks like the project partners made a video about it, with some good visuals. But i can't find the actual paper.

Press release with link to the video is here: https://frankfurt.de/de-de/aktuelle-meldung/meldungen/frankf...

FearNotDaniel12• 2 years ago

Thanks for helping to flesh out the technical side of the discussion while I’m over here getting hung up on the theology :-) this is what makes HN still (occasionally) great.

bjackman2• 2 years ago

I find it pretty cool how the spread of Christianity can be tracked so finely that a 50 update in earliest arrival time is exciting!

I started listening to a podcast called "the history of the early church" to learn a bit more about that but unfortunately I think the target audience was Christians interested in theology rather than nerds interested in history. Recommendations for books etc are welcome!

MontagFTB• 2 years ago

I’d recommend “2,000 Years of Christ's Power” by Nick Needham. I am not sure where it falls on your theology/history spectrum but it has some of both. I enjoyed the audiobook of Volume 1 immensely.

For me it did a great job describing the context in which the church began, the major figures throughout the early church, and the spread, schisms, and events that helped shape the church in its formative years.

kcsaba2• 2 years ago

The Triumph of Christianity: How the Jesus Movement Became the World's Largest Religion - Rodney Stark

graemep4• 2 years ago

I also like Stark's God's Battalions, which is a nice debunking of the conventional view of the crusades.

wolfhelius• 2 years ago

I had a long drive where I listened to The Great Courses, which had a set on early Christianity. I think the professor was from Notre Dame. The early church was wrestling with polytheism (is the OT god seemed really different from the NT god) and it eventually had to get resolved by the Council at Nicaea at Constantine's behest.

papandada• 2 years ago

I've never heard anyone say the early church wrestled with polytheism. Maybe that's my bias nestled in Christian circles of not using that word, in favour of something more like "the nature of the triune Godhead", etc.

mistrial97• 2 years ago

this seems like a sideways retelling of the "Gospels of Thomas" stories.. this is a nuanced topic and shrouded by history.. Suffice it to say that intellectuals and pious people knew very well the cults of Apollo, astrology of High Priests, nature worship, Egyptian deism, goddess worship, and pantheonism while the Christian scriptures were solidifying as a social blueprint.

dragonwriter• 2 years ago

Note that to non-Christian monotheists, the Christian resolution of that problem is often seen as polytheism with circumlocution.

alskdj21• 2 years ago

You might enjoy Let's Talk Religion[0] and ReligionForBreakfast[1]. Both have variety of topics not solely focused on Christianity.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/@LetsTalkReligion

[1] https://www.youtube.com/@ReligionForBreakfast

bjackman2• 2 years ago

Oh yeah I like ReligionForBreakfast!

Hilift2• 2 years ago

I think the more interesting developments occurred after the fall of the western Roman empire. The eastern empire (Constantinople) had frequent arguments and disputes with the west over nearly everything, including Christianity. The eastern Orthodox church refers to itself as the "Catholic Church" in internal documents. After the west fell in 476, they continued to present themselves as "the" Catholic church, which was changed forever in 1200 when the largest Christian city in the world (Constantinople) was destroyed. The destruction took two years, and most of the writings, art and treasure of the richest city in the world was either destroyed, stolen, or lost.

ithkuil• 2 years ago

In fact the very word catholic derives from the Greek words kata and holos

kamikazeturtles• 2 years ago

Did the fact that Christians from Western Europe looted Constantinople in 1200 play a role in the Eastern Roman Empire's decision to stop identifying themselves as part of the Catholic Church, or were there already deep theological and political divides?

tivert• 2 years ago

The eastern Orthodox church refers to itself as the "Catholic Church" in internal documents. After the west fell in 476, they continued to present themselves as "the" Catholic church...

Is that really so odd? Doesn't "catholic" mean something like "universal," and I think it would be very odd for one faction of a split organization to cede that kind of title to its rival faction.

I might be misunderstanding your point, but I kinda feel it should be followed up with a kind of "Did you know, Western European, that these two different things are actually similar in this way you didn't know about?"

wqaatwt4• 2 years ago

The Catholic church also consider itself to be Orthodox, just like the Orthodox Church is Catholic. Technically both are still the same same church (e.g. relative to Protestant churches) they just can't agree who is in charge.

The "Great Schism" wasn't even that great at the time, there were plenty of schisms that proceeded it, it just happened to be the last one and nobody really knew what it mean for the next few hundred years.

foobarian• 2 years ago

Speaking of history podcasts, I've gone through Mike Duncan's Rome and Revolutions, the Fall of Civilizations, Dan Carlin's Hardcore Histories... any suggestions for more like this? I noticed there is a Byzantium history series that seemed interesting.

HowardStark• 2 years ago

Thought pointedly not a podcast, the YouTube channel Historia Civilis was my go to thing to fall asleep to for a while. The simple animation style and depth I found very soothing.

anonymousDan• 2 years ago

The rest is history is pretty good.

rpicard• 2 years ago

History on Fire is another great one. He’s especially interested in military / martial arts but it has a bit of everything.

loudmax2• 2 years ago

The History of English podcast is worth a listen. It's about the development of the English language, so it covers a lot of history and prehistory, and also linguistics. The presenter Kevin Stroud has a deep passion for the subject matter. Unfortunately, he also has a tendency to repeat himself and over-explain simple examples so the effect can be somewhat soporific.

JackFr3• 2 years ago

Twelve Byzantine Rulers https://12byzantinerulers.com/

ecshafer• 2 years ago

Assuming you want more Long form, narrative style historical podcasts. History of the Germans, The French History Podcast, and The History of England are all very good in depth podcasts. I also enjoy the History of The Crusades, which is good, narrative and similar to Revolutions following various crusades.

BillSaysThis• 2 years ago

https://www.thebritishhistorypodcast.com/

The British History Podcast starts in deep pre-Roman times and, after ~460 episodes, is up to 1091.

strogonoff• 2 years ago

If you want a non-religious take on the history of Abrahamic religions, a recent episode 393 of the podcast by Sam Harriss, where he interviews historian Simon Sebag Montefiore, should be an interesting listen.

hobs• 2 years ago

My favorite find in the last few months is the youtube channel "esoterica" - here's his video on the origins of yaweh as a storm god https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdKst8zeh-U

He recommends books and primary sources for every episode and they vary from interesting more pubscience type stuff to incredibly expensive and deep academic sources out of print.

The gentleman who runs it is very obviously jewish in practice but only uses that to inform his historical context instead of override it, its very refreshing as someone who is an atheist.

loudmax2• 2 years ago

The Centre Place youtube channel has some pretty good lectures, including some very good lectures on Judaism and early Christianity: https://www.youtube.com/@centre-place/playlists

The videos are presented by a pastor of the Community of Christ church in Toronto, but they're from a historical rather than religious perspective.

janjongboom• 2 years ago

Seconding this - absolutely terrific content.

NemoNobody25• 2 years ago

I'd be very careful what you let others tell you about Early Christianity - almost exclusively they will explain to you how whatever belief they have now came out of it and compare the two and determine today we have truth...

Early was earlier tho - the people that twist our recent revelations about the content of the testaments to support the perverted teaching today are literally twisting the closest text in existence to Jesus himself, to "explain" (pervert) a statement Jesus says in the Gospel of Thomas - a text predating all Gospels, may actually be perverting words truly spoke by Jesus, which is "leading astray" the truth that has come out from the millenia - as he said it would...

Not one sentence of this have I heard someone speak or have I read on someone's page.

cogman107• 2 years ago

Data over dogma is a pretty good podcast about Christianity and Judaism. It's mostly about taking Bible stories and putting them into their historic context with the best evidence we have.

It's not about converting, just covering the history.

xwkd• 2 years ago

Produced by a Mormon whose dissertation was supervised by an atheist Professor of the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Religion. This may be a data point in favor of the trustworthiness of the podcast, or it may be an argument against, depending on your own personal point of view.

dddddaviddddd• 2 years ago

The “Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean” podcast is excellent. It’s mostly cut-up university lectures by the author, who teaches at York University in Toronto. https://www.philipharland.com/Blog/religions-of-the-ancient-...

oldmanhorton• 2 years ago

Someone already said The Rest is History, but one of the presenters of that podcast Tom Holland (not the actor) has also written extensively about the history of the catholic church in Millennium and Dominion. Highly recommended.

bigstrat2003• 2 years ago

Second the recommendation on Millennium, just note that for some stupid reason the US publisher decided to retitle the book "The Forge of Christendom". So if you're in the US you won't find it under its real title.

graemep4• 2 years ago

Not read Millennium, but Dominion is brilliant. its not just the history of the church, it explains how the West came to be what it is and the influence of Christianity.

It is also a useful corrective to the Western tendency to see its values and attitudes as universal, even where they are a product of a particular history and culture.

wslh2• 2 years ago

I think one of the oldest historical mentions of Jesus is by Josephus [1][2]. There is, however, scholarly discussion about whether parts of his references to Jesus were altered by later Christian scribes [3].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

[3] https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=jose...

markeroon• 2 years ago

This blew my mind when I first learned of it

mensetmanusman4• 2 years ago

The Didache predates Josephus.

ImJamal2• 2 years ago

The traditional view held by Christians is that the Gospel of Matthew was written within 10 years of Jesus' death. Modern scholars (often atheists) do not believe it though.

throw0101c2• 2 years ago

Recommendations for books etc are welcome!

See perhaps the references / (printed) sources at:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Almondsetat• 2 years ago

I mean, wouldn't you find it strange if historians from the year 4000 believed the sexual revolution of 1968 happened in 2018? Quite a discrepancy "only" 50 years

alsetmusic2• 2 years ago

I've been reading a lot about the early church for about a year and really enjoying it. I'm an atheist but I'm also a history nerd so it's been truly fascinating. Here are some that I've enjoyed:

- The Origin of Satan by Elaine Pagels; I read this one so casually that I don't have a good summary due to poor memory.

- The Passover Plot by Hugh J Schonfield; author contends that Jesus believed that he was the prophesied Messiah and engineered his arrest and crucifixion out of sheer genius and clever actions. Fantastic read.

- Jesus the Jew by Géza Vermes; author sees Jesus as a sincere apocalyptic preacher who believed he was the Messiah.

- From Jesus to Christ by Paula Fredriksen; author looks at how Jesus went from the Jewish Messiah to the head of a major religion.

- Becoming God by Bart Ehrman (you can find him doing interesting interviews or debates on YouTube); same as the one directly above.

- The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty; author contends that Jesus was not a historical figure, but rather another heavenly figure understood to have been crucified in the firmament between heaven and earth. I'm really impressed by the argument so far. I'm not quite finished with this one.

mistrial97• 2 years ago

Elaine Pagels is the one who got publication credit for the lost Gospels of Thomas.. that was discussed across the globe in literate circles. That book you mention by her is new to me

(1995). The Origin of Satan: How Christians Demonized Jews, Pagans, and Heretics. New York: Vintage Books. ISBN 978-0-679-40140-7

dmonitor5• 2 years ago

The Passover Plot by Hugh J Schonfield; author contends that Jesus believed that he was the prophesied Messiah and engineered his arrest and crucifixion out of sheer genius and clever actions. Fantastic read.

Orchestrating the destruction of the Jewish temple (and thus most Jewish religious practices) at the hands of the Roman Empire after his own death would have been quite the feat

NemoNobody25• 2 years ago

That's exactly what Jesus did and every prophet that has been before him also.

Each prophet sows the seeds for the next within their teachings - each prophet knows how their teachings will become perverted over time, each knows the end of the end of their religion before they start it but they start it anyways bc of the seeds - they can't unseen the fruits borne of them, to them it's plain how people areiving incorrectly and obvious as to what is important and why - it is up to each prophet to determine how to do this in their time and place, speaking to the hearts of the people at that time.

Then they only must pull a Muadib to transform their society - only those with great conviction and faith can do it bc it's quite likely that after a point the prophet also believes themselves to be "real" (they always were of course - if not they would not have had the ears to hear the truth behind what the last prophet said) -

A person playing prophet bc they have the ability to, believing that they are fact a prophet, and having true faith in what they teach - like John the Baptist, they will attain powers they had not - they will attain thru their faith alone not a divine intervention or blessing and not for certain reasons or with limit, it isn't necessary to need something to miracle it so, wanting alone is enough.

All prophets faked it til they made it - every one of can do exactly as they have, it only requires right belief, that we can.

Anyways I'm ranting what I should really just make into another Testament - it will be much, much shorter if I ever do.

sporc• 2 years ago

A lecture series by The Teaching Company called "The New Testament" taught by Bart Ehrman is an enjoyable academic introduction to the history of Early Christianity.

I also recommend another lecture series called "From Jesus to Christianity" by The Modern Scholar taught by Thomas F. Madden.

rkuykendall-com• 2 years ago

I know it's been a long time, but alongside the horsemen of atheism and reading the actual bible, The Teaching Company is where I got so much of my education.

atombender• 2 years ago

The excellent podcast The Rest is History has a vaguely connected series of episodes on the Roman Empire and its fall that includes a lot of discussion about the evolution of Christianity. The newest cycle, "Warlords of the West" (3 episodes on the emergence of the Frankish kingdom following the fall of the Roman Empire, a fascinating period not often talked about) and "Charlemagne" (3-part episode just on Charlemagne, who did more than any other Medieval figure ensured the spread of Christianity) have excellent about the political and religious forces that spread Christianity through Europe.

iamthejuan• 2 years ago

Try The great controversy between Christ and satan.

thih9• 2 years ago

Typically, amulets from this era contained a blend of Christian, Jewish, and pagan elements.

Interesting; does anyone have a link showing a typical amulet from that era, for comparison?

snapcaster2• 2 years ago

I found that interesting too, and curious about what it implies for how people thought about religion at the time

PittleyDunkin2• 2 years ago

I found that interesting too, and curious about what it implies for how people thought about religion at the time

Religion is an invention of the rennaisance. People at the time would have just perceived what we see as "religion" as worldview, much like people today typically believe in a fusion of economic theories.

paganel2• 2 years ago

Don't have any reasonable good links available but over here, further East (present-day Romania and then the Roman province of Dacia) there was a strong presence of Oriental/Siro-Palmyrian deities like Mithras, Dea Syria or Belus. There's this (non-academic) page [1] in Romanian which you can use Google translate on in order to get a better hang of it.

[1] https://historia.ro/sectiune/general/culte-si-credinte-in-da...

MrBuddyCasino2• 2 years ago

dates back to approximately 230-270 CE

The nerve to use "Common Era" when specifically talking about the spread of christianity.

abrenuntio7• 2 years ago

"He who testifies to these things says, ``Yes, I am coming soon.'' Amen. Come, Lord Jesus."

zen928• 2 years ago

I can't even begin to tell you how hard I unexpectedly laughed at your comment denoting a perceived lack of respect using an extremely commonly accepted scientific dating measurement. Nothing negative noted about any other piece, just a single cherry picked highlight to allow you to demonstrate socially acceptable puritan outrage when given the chance, even on something as insignificant as following common scientific processes. Very culturally relevant. Thanks for the entertainment!

MrBuddyCasino2• 2 years ago

I had to faintly smile at „scientific dating measurement“. God bless you.

toolslive3• 2 years ago

there might be even older evidence lurking if the following is true: "Jesus was Julius Divius"

https://www.carotta.de/eindex.html

briffid• 2 years ago

There is scientific consensus that Jesus was a historical figure, so the book referred here is probably fiction.

cogman107• 2 years ago

One of the more interesting pieces of evidence in the Bible.

The Roman census that required every family go back to their hometown did not happen (why would it?). Romans kept very good records of censuses and such an event would be well covered.

So why does the Bible have this story? The best guess is that Jesus was well known to have come from Nazareth. Yet the older messianic texts say the Messiah would be from Bethlehem. The gospel author undoubtedly was trying to square that circle to make sure the prophecy was fulfilled. Something they'd not need to do if Jesus wasn't real. The author had to explain to people who had grandparents who knew him as being from Nazareth why that still jives with older prophecies.

lucozade3• 2 years ago

There is scientific consensus that Jesus was a historical figure

It's fair to say that there is general consensus amongst Biblical scholars that there was a historical Jesus of Nazareth. Calling it a scientific consensus is a bit of a stretch though. As far as I'm aware there's zero scientific evidence for His existence. Just that the surviving textual evidence makes little sense if He didn't.

emmelaich3• 2 years ago

Related, for those interested in the history of religions and Christianity: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/book-review-the-rise-of-chr...

mistrial97• 2 years ago

a lot of male cult members join because the cult has hot girls. This seems to have been a big factor in the spread of early Christianity as well.

well, that explains it then </s>

Mistletoe• 2 years ago

As someone that went to church for that reason as a child I can tell you some things never change.

Decabytes• 2 years ago

It's super cool to see the digital unraveling of scrolls become more accessible. It's also amazing that we can still read the text of something that is nearly 2000 years old.

One thing I don't understand is the picture of the scroll though. I don't see how they were able to figure out the letters? They don't look like an alphabet to me

eschulz• 2 years ago

But what language is used for the inscription on the rolled silver amulet?

elevaet• 2 years ago

The article said Latin, but I don't know what script that is. It looks like it was written right-to-left so maybe it's Latin written in Hebrew script? I'm not even sure if that was a thing.

markovs_gun7• 2 years ago

No, it's written left to right, it's just extremely messy cursive. There are also abbreviations and special shorthand symbols.

ilamont• 2 years ago

The article mentions "18-line Latin text" but I was unable to recognize any word on the scroll (took Latin in high school) even something obvious like deus.

Was this some sort of Latin shorthand?

alexjm• 2 years ago

Some of the letter shapes look like Latin/Roman cursive, but even then I'm not sure I recognize any words either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_cursive

adamredwoods• 2 years ago

> Although I realized fairly early on that the New Testament Letter to the Philippians is quoted at the end, I still spent a long time puzzling over the text, which is written in quite a crude form of Latin. I consulted specialist literature and databases and, finally, made some suggestions for how it might be interpreted.
> The inscription begins with the Trisagion, the threefold cry of “Holy” [based on Isaiah 6:3], which remains part of the liturgy of the Eucharist to this day. In this case, however, it’s written in Greek [“agios, agios, agios”] but in Latin script.

https://www.uni-bonn.de/en/news/university-of-bonn-researche...

cvoss• 2 years ago

I can spot some of the shorthand. I see "Xp" a few times, which is actually imported from the Greek christos, abbreviated to chi-rho.

marc_abonce• 2 years ago

Also, each ΧΡ (Chi Rho) is preceded by another Christogram that sort of looks like IHS but I'm not sure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christogram

Edit: Actually, here's the full transcription in Latin and German: https://archaeologisches-museum-frankfurt.de/index.php/de/?v...

LightBug1• 2 years ago

Interesting, but just an antiquated historical tidbit?

What relevance in an age when the moral high ground is now a weakness or, at best, simply an ineffective strategy?

Silver amulet is the oldest evidence of Christianity north of the Alps

Related Stories