Historical Jesus, Biblical Jesus

[Bucky Ball]

Anyone know why only Roman coins from the reigns of Titus and Hadrian have the Christian symbol of the "anchor and the fish" ?

[Minimalist]

It's a tie in to Augustus' adage "Festina Lente,"  (Hasten Slowly.)  The anchor represents slowness and the dolphin ( not just a fish) represents swiftness.  Titus used it as a way to tie his dynasty to the Julio-Claudians.

Had nothing to do with fucking xhristards.

[Bucky Ball]

It's a tie in to Augustus' adage "Festina Lente,"  (Hasten Slowly.)  The anchor represents slowness and the dolphin ( not just a fish) represents swiftness.  Titus used it as a way to tie his dynasty to the Julio-Claudians.

Had nothing to do with fucking xhristards.

Thanks.
I see that dolphins were also used for a few hundred years by then.

[Minimalist]

When we visited Greece some years ago we bought a replica pottery piece at a tourist trap that was decorated in dolphins.  It was a copy of a Minoan original from the Middle Bronze Age.  So, yeah.  Dolphins were special to the ancients.

[Dancefortwo]

Anyone know why only Roman coins from the reigns of Titus and Hadrian have the Christian symbol of the "anchor and the fish" ?

I'm not sure about the reigns of Titus and Hadrian but this is the information on the denarii in Matthew that is completely out of place.

https://adversusapologetica.wordpress.co...e-gospels/

[Minimalist]

I'm sure by the time the gospel bullshitters were inventing their tales the Denarius was in general usage throughout the region.

[Bucky Ball]

[pythagorean]

I'm a Luddite, so I looked online for some instructions for viewing your video, since I certainly don't want to miss out on the magic.

But even after viewing an instructional video that teaches by example, I still couldn't get it to work.

How can I view your magical video? 

Example - 'Click' (Official Video) (OUT NOW)



Click (2006) Official Trailer 1 - Adam Sandler Movie

[Inkubus]

I'm a Luddite, so I looked online for some instructions for viewing your video, since I certainly don't want to miss out on the magic.

But even after viewing an instructional video that teaches by example, I still couldn't get it to work.

How can I view your magical video? 

A video showing you how to view a private video? Linky? 

But then your lack of interest in replying to direct questions is well noted. I thought I would ask anyway.

[Dave Armstrong]

Anyone know why only Roman coins from the reigns of Titus and Hadrian have the Christian symbol of the "anchor and the fish" ?

I'm not sure about the reigns of Titus and Hadrian but this is the information on the denarii in Matthew that is completely out of place.

https://adversusapologetica.wordpress.co...e-gospels/

Atheist charge: According to Matthew 26:15, the chief priests gave “thirty pieces of silver” to Judas. But how is that possible, since there were no silver coins used as currency in Jesus’ time, and there had not been any for about 300 years?

This is untrue. The shekel was made of silver, and was in use in Israel in the first century A.D. The silver shekel (94% or more pure) was first produced in Tyre (present-day Lebanon) in 125 BC and continued up through 66 AD. In the same book of Matthew, “the half-shekel tax” was referred to in 17:24. The Jewish first century historian Josephus referred to the half-shekel temple and civil tax or “tribute” (Wars of the Jews, VII, ch. 6. Sec. 6):

"Caesar . . . laid a tribute upon the Jews wheresoever they were, and enjoined every one of them to bring two drachmae every year into the Capitol, as they used to pay the same to the temple at Jerusalem." 

The drachma (primarily Greek) was made of silver (see also, Robert B. Strassler, The Landmark Thucydides, New York, Free Press [1996]. 620). A half-shekel (biblical Hebrew) was the equivalent of 1.676 drachmae (biblical Greek).


Moreover, at Horvat ‘Ethry in Israel (22 miles southwest of Jerusalem), between 1999 and 2001, Boaz Zissu and Amir Ganor of the Israeli Antiquities Authority discovered a half-shekel coin from the 2nd century A.D., with the words “Half-Shekel” in paleo-Hebrew on it. It had a silver content of 6.87 grams. See their article, “Horvat Ethri — A Jewish Village from the Second Temple Period and the Bar Kokhba Revolt in the Judean Foothills,” Journal of Jewish Studies 60 (1), Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies, London 2009, 90-136, pp. 96; 118.

But there is more. Smithsonian Magazine, in an article dated September 16, 2022 (“Ancient Coin Made in Defiance of Roman Rule Returns to Israel,” by Ella Feldman), noted that an ancient Jewish silver quarter-shekel, dated 69 A.D., had been found at an auction in Denver.

The Roman denarius was, according to the Wikipedia, “the standard Roman silver coin from its introduction in the Second Punic War c. 211 BC[1] to the reign of Gordian III (AD 238–244), . . .” It was in use in Israel. The same article states:

"In the New Testament, the gospels refer to the denarius as a day’s wage for a common laborer (Matthew 20:2,[21] John 12:5).[22] . . . The denarius is also mentioned in the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37). The Render unto Caesar passage in Matthew 22:15–22 and Mark 12:13–17 uses the word (δηνάριον) to describe the coin held up by Jesus, translated in the King James Bible as “tribute penny“. It is commonly thought to be a denarius with the head of Tiberius."

[Minimalist]

Archaeology to the rescue, again.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the...connection



The photo is of the Scaurus denarius described below.

The first denarius was issued in 58 BCE by Marcus Aemilius Scaurus, the governor of the Roman province of Syria. The province included all of the Judaean coast towns from Raphia to Dora, and also all of the non-Jewish towns east of the Jordan River. This distinctive coin commemorates Scaurus’ victory in 65 BCE over the Nabataean King Aretas III. 

So 58 BCE. Plenty of time for the coin to spread except that the Romans paid far more attention to the coastal towns and kept trying to shlep Judaea off to the Herodians for as long as they could get away with it.

[Dānu]

I'm not sure about the reigns of Titus and Hadrian but this is the information on the denarii in Matthew that is completely out of place.

https://adversusapologetica.wordpress.co...e-gospels/

Atheist charge: According to Matthew 26:15, the chief priests gave “thirty pieces of silver” to Judas. But how is that possible, since there were no silver coins used as currency in Jesus’ time, and there had not been any for about 300 years?

This is untrue. The shekel was made of silver, and was in use in Israel in the first century A.D. The silver shekel (94% or more pure) was first produced in Tyre (present-day Lebanon) in 125 BC and continued up through 66 AD. In the same book of Matthew, “the half-shekel tax” was referred to in 17:24. The Jewish first century historian Josephus referred to the half-shekel temple and civil tax or “tribute” (Wars of the Jews, VII, ch. 6. Sec. 6):

"Caesar . . . laid a tribute upon the Jews wheresoever they were, and enjoined every one of them to bring two drachmae every year into the Capitol, as they used to pay the same to the temple at Jerusalem." 

The drachma (primarily Greek) was made of silver (see also, Robert B. Strassler, The Landmark Thucydides, New York, Free Press [1996]. 620). A half-shekel (biblical Hebrew) was the equivalent of 1.676 drachmae (biblical Greek).


Moreover, at Horvat ‘Ethry in Israel (22 miles southwest of Jerusalem), between 1999 and 2001, Boaz Zissu and Amir Ganor of the Israeli Antiquities Authority discovered a half-shekel coin from the 2nd century A.D., with the words “Half-Shekel” in paleo-Hebrew on it. It had a silver content of 6.87 grams. See their article, “Horvat Ethri — A Jewish Village from the Second Temple Period and the Bar Kokhba Revolt in the Judean Foothills,” Journal of Jewish Studies 60 (1), Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies, London 2009, 90-136, pp. 96; 118.

But there is more. Smithsonian Magazine, in an article dated September 16, 2022 (“Ancient Coin Made in Defiance of Roman Rule Returns to Israel,” by Ella Feldman), noted that an ancient Jewish silver quarter-shekel, dated 69 A.D., had been found at an auction in Denver.

The Roman denarius was, according to the Wikipedia, “the standard Roman silver coin from its introduction in the Second Punic War c. 211 BC[1] to the reign of Gordian III (AD 238–244), . . .” It was in use in Israel. The same article states:

"In the New Testament, the gospels refer to the denarius as a day’s wage for a common laborer (Matthew 20:2,[21] John 12:5).[22] . . . The denarius is also mentioned in the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37). The Render unto Caesar passage in Matthew 22:15–22 and Mark 12:13–17 uses the word (δηνάριον) to describe the coin held up by Jesus, translated in the King James Bible as “tribute penny“. It is commonly thought to be a denarius with the head of Tiberius."

As far as I am aware, no one has made the claim you start your post disputing. Can you link me to the post where that claim was made?

As to the denarius being used for taxation in Jewish Palestine at the time, this is inconsistent with the historical record and is one piece of evidence that biblical passages with Jesus referring to denarii are anachronistic and therefore likely not historical. You can't contest the charge of anachronism by citing the very texts whose authenticity or accuracy is in question. That's just circular reasoning. You probably would have realized this if you'd bothered reading the article cited, so I can only assume that you didn't bother to do so before replying to Dance's post.

[Minimalist]

You know, Danu, after reading your reply I got curious about this 'half-shekel' coin that this jesus guy was allegedly so pissed off about.  I mean it is fairly easy to trace the beginnings of the use of Roman coinage in the region as we have a solid idea of when Roman influence began.  Pompey was back in Rome to celebrate his triumph in 61 BCE so we know that the initial period was prior to 61 and could not have begun before 64.  But what about "jewish coinage?"  Curiously, the Israel Antiquities Authority went wild a few years ago when someone found a Tyrian shekel in Jerusalem.  Tyre of course was in Phoenecia at the time and the coin had all sorts of pagan markings on it so no jew that we have ever been told about would have minted it.  It was big news when Gabriel Barkay, sifting through dirt removed from the Temple Mount by the Arab Waqf found 5 small coins....but none of them were called half shekel coins and in fact would have been too small.  Barkay dated them to the end of the 4th century BCE but,

https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340...87,00.html

The coins' design bore a striking resemblance to the ancient world's most widespread currency—the Athenian obol—and not coincidentally, as the Jewish minters copied it down to the symbol of the barn owl—an impure animal in Judaism that was synonymous with the Greek city-state.
 
However, the Jerusalemites did change the writing on the coin, from the Greek inscription of ΑΘΕ, symbolizing Athens, to the letters YHD in ancient Hebrew script, representing the Yehud Medinata, or autonomous province.
 
"Jerusalem was the capital of the Yehud Medinata at the time," Dvira explained. "These rare coins reflect the beginning of the transition in the region from trade using goods and precious metals—such as gold and silver—to trade using government-monitored coinage."

So, these supposedly devout "jews" minted a coin which carried the symbol of an impure animal associated with a Greek city?  But it is the last line which is really spot on.  Judaea, or Yehud as the Persians called it, was an impoverished shithole.  Most people probably never saw a coin in their lives.  They functioned in a subsistence economy and traded goods via bartering and taxes would have been paid in goods as well.  The bible bullshit story reflects a much later reality which is what Yonatan Adler set out to show in his book about the dubious origins Judaism.

I'll have to study this a bit more.

[Dave Armstrong]

As far as I am aware, no one has made the claim you start your post disputing.  Can you link me to the post where that claim was made?

Happy to:

2. Thirty pieces of silver 

According to Matthew 26:15, the chief priests “weighed out thirty pieces of silver” to give to Judas. . . . There were no “pieces of silver” used as currency in Jesus’ time – they had gone out of circulation about 300 years before. ("New Testament Contradictions," Paul Carlson)

[Dānu]

As far as I am aware, no one has made the claim you start your post disputing.  Can you link me to the post where that claim was made?

Happy to:

2. Thirty pieces of silver 

According to Matthew 26:15, the chief priests “weighed out thirty pieces of silver” to give to Judas. . . . There were no “pieces of silver” used as currency in Jesus’ time – they had gone out of circulation about 300 years before. ("New Testament Contradictions," Paul Carlson)

That isn't a link to the post, that's an excerpt. I don't doubt you, but I'd like to see the context of the post to know who was making the claim and why. I can't do that with an excerpt. The number of the post would serve just as well. Thanks in advance.

[Minimalist]

BTW, Dave...










You might want to re-think your signature.  I realize facts mean little to bible thumpers but.... there you go.

[Dave Armstrong]

That isn't a link to the post, that's an excerpt.  I don't doubt you, but I'd like to see the context of the post to know who was making the claim and why.  I can't do that with an excerpt.  The number of the post would serve just as well.  Thanks in advance.


Dunno what you mean. It does link to the entire post.

[SeaPigeon]

I like your signature Dave. My tiny pea brain takes great comfort in knowing that a genius hasn't got the foggiest about what it's all about.

[Dānu]

That isn't a link to the post, that's an excerpt.  I don't doubt you, but I'd like to see the context of the post to know who was making the claim and why.  I can't do that with an excerpt.  The number of the post would serve just as well.  Thanks in advance.


Dunno what you mean. It does link to the entire post.

What is the url of the post? I can't locate it by you simply quoting it.

[Dave Armstrong]

You might want to re-think your signature.  I realize facts mean little to bible thumpers but.... there you go.

No need to. I never claimed that Einstein believed in a personal God. As usual, you spew out yet more non sequiturs. It's your stock-in-trade.

I’m not an atheist and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. (From an interview, quoted in Glimpses of the Great by G. S. Viereck [Macauley, New York, 1930], cited in Max Jammer, Einstein and Religion [Princeton University Press, 1999], p. 48)

My comprehension of God comes from the deeply felt conviction of a superior intelligence that reveals itself in the knowable world. In common terms, one can describe it as ‘pantheistic’ (Spinoza). (Answer to the question, “What is your understanding of God?” Kaizo, 5, no. 2, 1923, 197; in Alice Calaprice, editor, The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000, 203)

I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings. (Ibid., 204 / Telegram to a Jewish newspaper, 1929; to Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue in New York . Einstein Archive 33-272)

I am of the opinion that all the finer speculations in the realm of science spring from a deep religious feeling. (Calaprice, ibid., 206 / Forum and Century 83, 1930, 373)

It is very difficult to elucidate this [cosmic religious] feeling to anyone who is entirely without it . . . In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it. (Calaprice, ibid., 207 / Einstein on Cosmic Religion and Other Opinions & Aphorisms, 1931, 48-49)


[T]he belief in the existence of basic all-embracing laws in Nature also rests on a sort of faith. All the same this faith has been largely justified so far by the success of scientific research. But, on the other hand, everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe — a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive. (To student Phyllis Right, who asked if scientists pray, January 24, 1936. Einstein Archive 42-601, 52-337; from Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffmann, Albert Einstein, the Human Side [Princeton Univ. Press, 1981], pp. 32-33)

At first, then, instead of asking what religion is I should prefer to ask what characterizes the aspirations of a person who gives me the impression of being religious: a person who is religiously enlightened appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with thoughts, feelings and aspirations to which he clings because of their super-personal value . . . Accordingly a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance of those super-personal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation . . . If one conceives of religion and science according to these definitions then a conflict between them appears impossible. For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. . . . Now, even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other, nevertheless there exist between the two strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies . . . science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. . . . a legitimate conflict between science and religion cannot exist. . . . But whoever has undergone the intense experience of successful advances made in this domain is moved by profound reverence for the rationality made manifest in existence. By way of the understanding he achieves a far-reaching emancipation from the shackles of personal hopes and desires, and thereby attains that humble attitude of mind toward the grandeur of reason incarnate in existence, and which, in its profoundest depths, is inaccessible to man. This attitude, however, appears to me to be religious, in the highest sense of the word. (“Science and Religion”: Address at the Conference on Science, Philosophy, and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, New York, 1940; in Ideas and Opinions [Crown: New York, 1954, 1982], p. 46; also published in Nature, 146: 605-607 [1940] )

In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views. (Ibid., 214 / reply to German anti-Nazi diplomat and author Hubertus zu Lowenstein around 1941. Quoted in the latter’s book, Towards the Further Shore, London, 1968, 156)

Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source . . . They are creatures who can’t hear the music of the spheres. (Ibid., 214 / 7 August 1941. Einstein Archive 54-297)

The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. (quoted in Robert N. Goldman, Einstein’s God: Albert Einstein’s Quest as a Scientist and as a Jew to Replace a Forsaken God  [Jason Aronson: 1997] )

I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being. (Letter to Guy H. Raner Jr., 28 September 1949, quoted by Michael R. Gilmore in Skeptic, Vol. 5, No. 2)

Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in point of fact, religious. (Response to atheist, Alfred Kerr [Winter 1927] who, after deriding ideas of God and religion at a dinner party in the home of the publisher Samuel von Fischer, had queried him “I hear that you are supposed to be deeply religious” — as quoted in Diaries of a Cosmopolitan, 1918-1937, by H. G. Kessler, [Littlehampton Book Services Ltd, 1971 edition] )

For much more, see: Albert Einstein’s “Cosmic Religion”: In His Own Words

[Dave Armstrong]

What is the url of the post?  I can't locate it by you simply quoting it.

I linked to it when I answered your question! Go follow the link!

[Dave Armstrong]

I like your signature Dave. My tiny pea brain takes great comfort in knowing that a genius hasn't got the foggiest about what it's all about.

Me too! It's wonderful.

[Dānu]

What is the url of the post?  I can't locate it by you simply quoting it.

I linked to it when I answered your question! Go follow the link!

The only link you provided was to outside this forum. Who on this forum made the claim you are rebutting and what is the url of the post on this forum where they made that argument?

[mordant]

What is the url of the post?  I can't locate it by you simply quoting it.

I linked to it when I answered your question! Go follow the link!

There is no link, other than the internal link within the quote to something off-site. Each post on the site has a URL. Also you did not cite who posted it, or when.

If you bring that post back up you'll see post # on it. Hover over it and you'll see that it's "hot". Choose "Copy Link" (or similar, depending on your browser) from the context menu for that link. Or just click on the post # and then copy the URL from your browser's URL box. The link for this very post for instance is:

https://atheistdiscussion.org/forums/sho...#pid413567

[Dave Armstrong]

Who on this forum made the claim you are rebutting and what is the url of the post on this forum where they made that argument?

I didn't claim that anyone here made the argument. I was simply pasting some related material from my large collection of my own writings.