Re: Dura-Europos Exhibition at Boston Co

Msg # 3994 of 4000 on RelayNet Serious Chats on History
Time: Saturday, 4-02-11, 5:55
[ List Messages | List Conferences | Previous Message | Next Message ]
>JTEM wrote;
>Except for three points:
>The first is that it's interpreted -- post
>Christianity -- to be a Christian "Good
>Shepard" fresco.
>[Our timeline is Mid-3rdC] Have you ever
>visited the Catacombs outside of Rome or
>any Roman museums?
>JTEM wrote;
>The catacombs are hardly without issue,
 Of course, when offered proof opposing you there are always *issues*
or it's problematic or whatever.
 Many early catacombs were started by Pagans but later Christians became
the vast majority of the burials.
  Pagan wall paintings, engraving, etc being miss-identified as
Christian has happened but usually corrected by modern scholars.
>including dating.
 The earliest Rome catacomb (C1 to C4) with Christian ties and the
earliest Christian tombs ID'ed Late-2C.
Also there are 3 Popes buried there with dated inscriptions in our
>[If not, 'Google Image' catacombs "good
>shephard" rome.]
>You're simply arguing in circles here.
>Yes, Christianity did adopt that "Good
>Shepard" iconography,
Yes! And in our timeframe they were the *very vast* majority using that
>but they were far from the first,
>and they weren't even alone in the 4th
>century, let alone earlier.
Yes you have said that before (2000+yrs and by other cultures).
And I've asked you (twice maybe?) to back it up (fresco, mosaic, vase
painting, etc) with *that* theme within our timeframe.
 Provide the same proof you always demand from others, not *your*
 All I'm saying 'in our timeline ± 100yrs' it was almost exclusively
used by Christians.
 And the evidence (which you lack) is in many catacombs, some museums,
etc and of Christian origin.
BTW I do know of a C2 Pagan one.
>"The good Shepard" does not nor can not
>identify christians.
In our timeframe it's almost a given.
 So back-up your claim and prove me wrong with evidence that it was
also a popular *image* among non-Christians in our timeframe.
>[That image is very very popular and
>seems to be exclusively Christian]
>No it doesn't.
 You are correct, I misspoke. I should have said "and seems to be
*almost* exclusively Christian.
  Admitting when wrong is a nice trait and IIRC in another thread
you actually admitted to doing it *once*.
>The problem is that it's always identified
>as Christian.
Duh! Possibly because the vast majority of times they are, within the
proper timeframe of course.
 But some Pagan images have been ID'ed Christian in the distant/recent
past but more often than not modern day scholars dismiss it or question
its validity.
>That's certainly a very problematic
>interpretation, as it goes on to identify
>Adam and Eve in the very same fresco.
>Jesus in Edan? That's not right...
>[He's not!!!]
>Sorry, you're just plain wrong.
 Sorry my ass!!!!
 You purposely Fucking cut-out my whole explaination for "He's not!!!"
(In Eden) (my complete post below).
  That's being very deceitful and doing that and then responding to
it would be
 You and Giwer are 2 peas in a pod as you both employ these same
tactics when you can't prove your point.
 And No, I'm not going to waste my time proving that point to you.
>The fresco includes what the same bible
>thumpers call Adam & Eve.
 And scholars and there is a reason for it (below).
>[Use a little common sense.]
[SNIP BS website article with an agenda]
>At left is the Good Shepherd, a common
>image for Christ;. Below that image,
>roughly sketched is Adam and Eve.
>There. EXACTLY as I said.
As *I* also stated in the section you cut-out!
It's roughly sketched but detailed if you did any research you might
know that (see below).
>This next one, just to be fair, seems to
>recognize the problem and invents the
>idea that it's Adam & Eve "after the fall."
 Try getting all the facts before inventing them yourself and being
shown to be a fool.
>What -- if anything -- so much as hints at
>this they of course never say...
 Nor did you try to find out, it was just an informative snippet not a
damn thesis!
>The Good Shepherd with Adam and Eve
>After the Fall
>howall.php?title=early-christian_4 Ironic.
>You're denying the two additional figures
>in the painting,
Another lie. Your deceptive cutting of my response makes it appear that
way though.
 I said that they were *in the fresco* and even described location,
size, etc and even detail (reposted bottom of page) but you knew that
>and what the bible thumpers identify them
And scholars.
>You're in a free fall fantasy....
And you're a liar and deceitful.
 Anyone can go back to my last posting or look below and see exactly
what you did.
 It is you in fantasyland because in your reality you imagine that no
one will catch-on when you *openly* do this and this is far from the 1st
time, I read your posts and No, I am not going waste my time in a google
groups search.
>[It's a religious painting making a
>statement above what is almost certainly
>a Baptistery.]
>That is entirely circular.
 The only thing circular here is your spinning.
>FIRST the image is misinterpreted as a
>screwed up
No, it is ONLY interpreted as that by YOU any idiot can see the main
focus of the fresco is 'The Good Shepherd'.
 It is making a simple statement (original sin and redemption thru
 It is a painting showing 2 seperate stories that are tied together
and the *much larger scene* is the *main theme*.
 The *whole complete smaller Eden scene* with small people, small
tree, etc takes-up slightly more area than just the shepherd alone
 The shepherd and the flock of sheep take-up a *much* larger area in the
painting and they are centered.
 And the Eden image is located below and off in a sidecorner from the of
main Shepherd/flock theme.
 But you see the complete painting as the 'Garden of Eden'...Amazing!
  So in esp religious art you have *never* seen this technique with
a large main theme with other much smaller scenes around it (painting,
stained glass windows, etc) and it's relating a religious story?
 They are often seen in structures called museums and churches FYI.
>and only FOLLOWING that everything
>else is interpreted within that fantasy.
 Please don't ever let scholars, facts or common sense cloud your
amazing clear vision.
>[Small image in lower left corner; 'Adam,
>Eve, serpent, tree', Man's Original Sin.]  
>This "Serpent" is absent from almost
>every other description, as is the "Tree."
So if YOU don't see or hear about it on a couple of websites it doesn't
exist and it's just made-up by the bible-thumpers...correct?
 1st off I'm not going to waste my time for you by searching for it.
 And in 14yrs on the internet no one has ever called me out for being a
liar or deceitful, so going on what I have seen and read about this is
as far as I go.
 I don't know exactly how it is done or what it is called. But by
using a (hi-def?) camera, light filters?, UV light? different light wave
lengths, etc they can bring out an invisible to the naked eye or a very
weak image.
 I've seen many results of this on the internet, books, documentaries
being done on frescos, graffiti, etc and it is usually an outline sketch
of what was discovered which is sometimes overlaid over the original.
>These pillars or whatever they are would
>have to be "Trees," plural, as there are
>more than one.
 So wildly guessing *again*?
The hi-tec resulting sketch of that small scene is very detailed.
 A small podium with a pillar in each corner (no roof) in the center of
the podium is a single tree.
 Using Adam's height the trunk is ~2m and the leaves/branches/fruit
section is round like a bush.
 Common sense here so I'll try not to lose you.
 The structure is an open-air shrine beyond a doubt, this is after all
God's Tree of Knowledge, so *the artist* puts it in a shrine as it is
unlike all other trees and a common structure seen in the Pagan Roman
 Adam stands on one side of the tree, Eve on the other.
 Both have one hand covering their genitals and the other reaching up
the tree.
 On the ground before the podium is a simply drawn snake.
>You're making my point. People are
>merely seeing what they want to see.
 And once again you prove your own point!
>Main larger image centered; 'Good
>Shephard' aka Jesus Christ. Accept Jesus
>as savour, get head dunked in water, and
>get a clean sin slate or something like
>These words don;t appear ANYWHERE
>on the image.
 If you didn't realize that they were my words for an interpertion of
a religious scene you have a serious problem with reality that you
should address.
>They're entirely made up.
 Those words have been around quite for a while, I just put them in a
certain order to make a point HTH.
 You see this is how I'd guess the majority of rational non-agenda
loons with a just a basic knowledge of Christianity and common sense
would interpert this fresco esp in a place of honor over a Christian
>Again, you're making my point:
 I can't envision that ever happening in my lifetime if I always have
my current state of mind.
>You're not talking about Dura Europa,
>you're talking about some fantasy with
>serpents & text...
 I have *repeatedly* proven you wrong regarding your fantasy BS
opinions using 'proof vs your opinion/no proof'.
 Your 'text' issue though is completely off-the-wall behaviour.
  I'm done responding on this thread with you as it is a total waste
of my time which I already knew when I so foolishly responded. ~Walter
[The text which you cut]
>He's not!!! Use a little common sense.
>It's a religious painting making a
>statement above what is almost certainly
>a Baptistery.
>Small image in lower left corner; 'Adam,
>Eve, serpent, tree', Man's Original Sin.
>Main larger image centered; 'Good
>Shephard' aka Jesus Christ. Accept Jesus
>as savour, get head dunked in water, and
>get a clean sin slate or something like
--- FIDOGATE 4.4.10
 * Origin: FTN Gate on (900:900/1.98)

[ List Messages | List Conferences | Previous Message | Next Message ]
Search this conference for:

© 2018 The Trashcan BBS - All rights reserved.