Category Archives: archeology

Ancient Christian parody/mockery- we worship an ass?

In 1857, some early graffiti was discovered in an unearthed guardroom on the Palatine Hill. Known as the Alexamenos Graffito, it is an image which is scratched into the plaster of the wall and shows a man with the head of an ass being crucified, and then a man next to him- his hands possibly raised in prayer.  This graffito is thought to be conceived sometime between 50 CE and 200 CE  and is the earliest depiction of the crucifixion that we possess, with the first Christian depictions not arising until the early 6th century. The text in Greek reads:

ALE
XAMENOS
SEBETE
THEON

which means, “Alexamenos worships his god.”

Interestingly enough,  this was a common charge against the Jews and later the Christians in the infancy of the Christian faith.  Marcus Cornelius Fronto, a pagan orator and rhetorician, condemned the Christians in a lost speech, fragments of which are preserved by Minucius Felix in the Octavius. In it he writes

“the religion of the Christians is foolish, inasmuch as they worship a crucified man, and even the instrument itself of his punishment. They are said to worship the head of an ass, and even the nature of their father” (Octavius IX).

Tertullian mentioned that the pagans think “our god is an ass’s head” (Apology, XVI). when he writes

“For, like some others, you are under the delusion that our god is an ass’s head”

Tertullian refers again to this notion that “our god is actually the head of an ass” in Book I of Ad Nationes, where he accuses pagans of being no better and in fact gets a little feisty at the end. [a quip that can't help but make me smile.

Some of you have entertained the dream that our god is actually the head of an ass. Cornelius Tacitus first launched this fantasy in the fourth book of his Histories where he recounts the Jewish war. Starting with the origins of the Jewish people, he traces the source of their religion and its name. He relates how the Jewish people, hard-pressed for water and wondering abroad in desolate places, were delivered by following the lead of a herd of wild asses thought to be in search of water after feeding. For this reason the likeness of this animal is worshiped by the Jew. This is why I believe that we Christians, being linked to the Jewish religion, are associated with the same image. You in fact worship the ass in its entirety, not just the head. And then you throw in Epona, the patron saint of donkeys and all the beasts of burden, cattle, and wild animals. You even worship their stables. Perhaps this is your charge against us that in the midst of all these indiscriminate animal lovers, we save our devotion for asses alone!" (XI)

He also defends Christians against the charge of a Roman Jew.

There is now a new rumor about our God going the rounds. Recently a most depraved individual from Rome, your city, had defected from his own faith and allowed his skin to be shredded by wild beasts. Every day he would hire himself out for viewing while his skin was stripped. He would carry around a picture directed against us with the heading "Onocoetes," meaning Donkey Priest. It was a picture of a man wearing a toga and the ears of the donkey with a book in hand and one leg ending in a hoof. And the crowd believed this Jewish man. Who else plants the seed of our infamous reputation? As a result the whole city is talking about the Donkey Priest." (XIV)

The graffito also represents how contemptible and absurd the idea of a crucified god was to pagan thinking, and harkens pack to when St. Paul remarked that the crucifixion was "a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles," [1 Corinthians 1:23].


The Lord’s Prayer in Old English

Old English” is version of English spoken from approximately AD 450 to about 1100, and was in use in much of England and southeast Scotland. It also known as “Anglo-Saxon”, and is a combination of the Germanic based languages of Old Norse and Old Frisian, and Latin.

Fæder ure

Fæder ure þu þe eart on heofonum;

Si þin nama gehalgod

to becume þin rice

gewurþe ðin willa

on eorðan swa swa on heofonum.

urne gedæghwamlican hlaf syle us todæg

and forgyf us ure gyltas

swa swa we forgyfað urum gyltendum

and ne gelæd þu us on costnunge

ac alys us of yfele soþlice

*

*

Translation of Old English Text

Father our thou that art in heavens

be thy name hallowed

come thy kingdom

be-done thy will

on earth as in heavens

our daily bread give us today

and forgive us our sins

as we forgive those-who-have-sinned-against-us

and not lead thou us into temptation

but deliver us from evil. truly


Complaints Medieval Monks Scribbled in the Margins of Illuminated Manuscripts

Complaints Medieval Monks Scribbled in the Margins of Illuminated Manuscripts

This is a reposting of an interesting brainpickings article. In it they list a number of curious notes in margins and colophons made by medieval scribes in whatever biblical manuscripts they were writing. [Note; a colophone is an endnote that might include the scribes name, or the place and date when he wrote and finished the manuscript. One could think of it as a scribe's "signature." Leaving a colophon is a  practice that is almost unknown in early biblical documents, but become relatively normal in late minuscules]

“New parchment, bad ink; I say nothing more.

“I am very cold.”

“That’s a hard page and a weary work to read it.”

“Let the reader’s voice honor the writer’s pen.”

“This page has not been written very slowly.”

“The parchment is hairy.”

“The end of the book- Thanks be to God!”

“The ink is thin.”

“Thank God, it will soon be dark.”

“Oh, my hand.”

“Now I’ve written the whole thing; for Christ’s sake give me a drink.”

“Writing is excessive drudgery. It crooks your back, it dims you sight, it twists your stomach and your sides.”

“St. Patrick of Armagh, deliver me from writing.”

“While I wrote I froze, and what I could not write by the beams of the sun I finished by candlelight.”

“As the harbor is welcome to the sailor, so is the last line to the scribe.”

“This is sad! O little book! A day will come in truth when someone over your page will say, ‘The hand that wrote it is no more’.

 


The woman caught in adultery doesn’t belong in the Bible.

They went each to his own house. but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them.The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.” John 7:53- 8:11.

Most people are familiar with the story of the woman caught in adultery [the pricope of the adultress]. It tends to get preached a lot and one particular line “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her” tends to get misquoted and twisted by pagans and laypeople alike. Still, it is extremely iconic and in many ways serves as a great example of the mercy and love of Jesus.  Despite that, I don’t think this verse should be in the Bible and the entire section should be relegated to a footnote at the bottom of the page. There are lot of reasons for this. For a long time Biblical scholars have recognized the poor textual credentials of the story of the woman caught in adultery. It has nowhere near the same pedigree that other parts of the scriptures it and the evidence against its authenticity is overwhelming.

To give a brief assessment, the earliest writings of the gospel of John we have simply do not contain this story. P66, a papyrus that contains almost the entire gospel of John, including chapters 7-8, and is dated to 175-200CE, does not contain the story. P75, a fragment dated to the early 3rd century and which contains these portions, does not contain the story.  Of the four great unical codices, codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus, both from the fourth century and which are  considered to be the most important biblical manuscripts of the NT extant today, do not contain these verses. codex Alexandrinus, from the fifth century, lacks several leaves in the middle of John. But because of the consistency of the letter size, width of lines, and lines per page, the evidence is conclusive that this manuscript also lacked the pericope adulterae. codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, also from the 5th century, apparently lacked these verses as well [it is similar to Alexandrinus in that some leaves are missing]

We neither find the story in codex Washingtonianus from the 5th century or in codex Borgianus, also from the 5th century.The Diatessaron, a harmony of the gospels written by Tatianin 150-165CE does not contain the story. Origen and Chrystosom, men who wrote commentaries on the text of John, do not include or comment on the story. No Greek Church Father prior to the 9th century comments on the passage [with the possible exception of Dydimus the Blind], and in fact there are hundreds of manuscripts and miniscules which do not contain it. Metzger writes ” It is absent from such early and diverse manuscripts as Papyrus66.75 Aleph B L N T W X Y D Q Y 0141 0211 22 33 124 157 209 788 828 1230 1241 1242 1253 2193 al…In the East the passage is absent from the oldest form of the Syriac version (syrc.s. and the best manuscripts of syrp), as well as from the Sahidic and the sub-Achmimic versions and the older Bohairic manuscripts. Some Armenian manuscripts and the old Georgian version omit it. In the West the passage is absent from the Gothic version and from several Old Latin manuscripts “

Another interesting thing is that this story is not static but rather is found in different places in different manuscripts. Most manuscripts that have it place it in its now traditional location: between John 7:52 and 8:12, but an entire family of manuscripts has the passage at the end of Luke 21, while another family places it at the end of John’s Gospel. We have some manuscripts that place it at the end of Luke or in various places in John 7. Furthermore, for those manuscripts that do have it, we also see that many contain only parts of it, some stopping at John 8:3, or some only having up to John 8:9. Ultimately though it took up permanent residence, in the ninth century, in the middle of the fourth gospel. When we take all this information together, I think its clear that this story has all the earmarks of a pericope that was looking for a home.

That being said I don’t think we can dismiss it outright as not being apostolic. I think we have enough evidence to suppose that it probably did occur. Bruce Metzger writes “At the same time the account has all the earmarks of historical veracity. It is obviously a piece of oral tradition which circulated in certain parts of the Western church and which was subsequently incorporated into various manuscripts at various places”, inserted by scribes and others creating the texts. We do have several people alluding to it or to  a story similar to it during the 4th century and possibly earlier, and it is plausible to conclude that it may have been a genuine interaction that Jesus had. But being written in the original Gospel of John by the writer of John? I think that’s highly unlikely.

None of this is new to any biblical scholar, though it may be to the layperson, and that is sort of my point. If this story is not authentically Johannian, why are we preaching it like it is? Why do we elevate it to equal position as the rest of scripture? I would suggest that we excise this story altogether. We have precedent for it. Unless you own a KJV, the Johhanine comma of 1 John 5:7–8 is no longer in our Bibles. Why? Because we realized it was inauthentic and we removed it from our modern translations,generally relegating it to a footnote. We should do the same with this.

I understand that many people have a strong sense of attachment to this story, but sentimentality that is misplaced is no substitute for the truth, though this is the sort of thing that will garner sentimental defenders without textual support. I think if people do preach on it, then they should have the honesty, integrity, and intellectual faculties to recognize that this is an enormous textual variant that is unlikely to be original to the text, and they should tell their congregations that- not quote it as if weren’t. To end with a Daniel Wallace quote  “We have to educate believers. Instead of trying to isolate laypeople from critical scholarship, we need to insulate them.”


The Oxyrhynchus Hymn

The following is taken from a manuscript fragment known as Parchment Oxyrhyncus 15.1786 [or more commonly as POxy 1786]. It was found on a papyri fragment in an ancient garbage dump in Egypt in 1918  and dates from the late 3rd century. It is significant for two reasons:

  1. It is the latest in date of the extant compositions using ancient Greek music notation and thus marks the end of that era.
  2. It is the earliest extant example of Christian hymnody. There are a few other hymns that are arguably older, including “Hail, Gladdening Light” and some passages of the New Testament [though there's some disagreement there if they are hymns or merely poetic flights]

The Oxyrhynchus Hymn


“(Spoken) [Σε Πάτερ κόσμων, Πάτερ αἰώνων, μέλπωμεν] ὁμοῦ, πᾶσαι τε Θεοῦ λόγιμοι δο[ῦλο]ι. Ὅσα κ[όσμος ἔχει πρὸς ἐπουρανίων ἁγίων σελάων.]
(Sung) [Πρ]υτανήω σιγάτω, μηδ’ ἄστρα φαεσφόρα λ[αμπέ]
(Spoken) σθων, [ἀπ]ολει[όντων] ῥ[ιπαὶ πνοιῶν, πηγαὶ]
(Sung) ποταμῶν ῥοθίων πᾶσαι. Υμνούντων δ’ ἡμῶν [Π]ατέρα χ’ Υἱὸν χ’ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα, πᾶσαι δυνάμεις ἐπιφωνούντων· Ἀμήν, Ἀμήν. Κράτος, αἶνος [ἀεὶ καὶ δόξα Θεοὶ δωτῆρι μόνῳ πάντων] ἀγαθῶν· Ἀμήν, Ἀμήν.”

. . . Let it be silent,

Let the luminous stars not shine,

let the winds and all the noisy rivers die down;

and as we hymn the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

let all the powers add ‘Amen, amen.’

Empire, praise always, and glory to God,

the sole giver of all good things.

Amen, amen.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Powered by WordPress.com