®Monomakhos

The Megiddo Mosaic: an Archaeological Rebuke to the Liberals

by

In all the excitement that the election season provides us (remember?), we often forget what’s really important.  This is one of those times.

Peter Papoutsis, a long-time reader of this blog as well as an avid archaeology buff, sent us the following article from The Daily Mail.

https://dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-14096551/earliest-inscription-jesus-god-srael-prison-ancient-discovery.html?to=native_share_article-natve-menubutton

According to this article, a mosaic –the “Megiddo Mosaic”–found underneath an Israeli prison provides the earliest proof outside the New Testament of the Church’s belief that Jesus was God.

So, contrary to what liberals and Unitarians have been proclaiming ever since the so-called Enlightenment, Christians believed that Jesus was God incarnate from the start of the Church.  The mosaic itself dates from AD 220, a full one hundred years before the Council of Nicaea, which according to liberals, was when Constantine the Great “hijacked” the Church for his own political purposes.

This line of thinking is hogwash and always has been.

Think of it:  to undertake an artistic expression like this cost a lot of money; money most Christians didn’t have.  It was also a dangerous statement, given the fact that the Roman Empire, as well as the Jewish hierarchy, had outlawed Christianity.  Why would early Christians want to proclaim the divinity of Christ which was the reason they were persecuted?

So, this holiday season, when you gather around the dinner table with your uncle who’s the village atheist or your niece who is home from college fresh with stupid ideas about this, that, or the other thing, just show them this clip.

Comments

  1. I don’t know if anyone else has had this happen, but depending on which browser I use, a different weeks old version of the Monomakhos home page comes up. And even that page is unstable if you click on a comment it might revert to a page before that comment even appeared.

    Very strange.

    In any case, George asked my opinion about a commentary on the election on Substack called Badlands which suggested that the Deep State allowed Trump to win so as to not completely ruin the legitimacy of elections in the minds of the public.

    That is indeed possible. But what I would say also is that election fraud was rampant in the states that Harris won, even to the point that you should consider 312 electoral votes as the floor of Trump’s victory, not what the real total would have been fraud free. And so the imperative is as the article suggested that we need to simply force election integrity to take over nationwide. That’s the best way to secure perpetual MAGA rule.

    (Editor Note: Highlighted a portion of your comment so George will see it.)

    • Most of the places I frequent on the Internet are playing old material from 2021, 2022, etc. Something weird is going on.

      If the Deep State wanted Trump to win, he wouldn’t have won this big. And why would the Deep State care about how people feel about election fraud? They tried to kill us! Worrying about what the public thinks is probably not high on their list of priorities.

      Will Rothschild of the richest family on earth died yesterday. A house fire, apparently. https://abc7.com/post/man-found-dead-following-house-fire-hollywood-hills/15597510/ Forbes said the Rothchilds were worth 500 trillion (2024). They were purportedly responsible for 2 billion COVID vaccines. https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/wealth/rothschild-net-worth/

      Jacob Rothschild died in February. No official cause of death. I don’t understand why people who are that wealthy don’t live longer than they do.

    • Re:

      “I don’t know if anyone else has had this happen, but depending on which browser I use, a different weeks old version of the Monomakhos home page comes up. And even that page is unstable if you click on a comment it might revert to a page before that comment even appeared”

      Ever since this rebuilt Monomakhos site came back,
      i have found (using Chrome on my phone) that each visit necessitates clearing the browsing history for this site (and only this site – other sites are not affected) or else it shows me the site as it was on the date of my last prior visit. I’ve gotten into the habit of clearing the browsing data on each visit, and this seems to solve the issue.

      No other site I visit has this issue, not even those others that also ‘spew Russian propaganda and misinformation (LOL!)’, so it seems to be an issue only with this particular site

      (Editor Note: Highlighted a portion of your comment so George will see it.)

  3. The idea that the earliest Christians didn’t believe Christ was God, to me, shows they don’t know how to read the Scriptures. Let’s just take one example: the prophecy that speaks of the voice crying in the wilderness. The Gospel writers clearly understood this as being John the Baptist. Who is He preparing the way for? Christ, of course. But when you look at this in the OT, who is the Lord? It’s the LORD, aka the divine Name, aka the God of the universe.

    It’s all there. But some just don’t want to see it. Many don’t. But I do hope this new find is useful to some doubters.

      • The continual practice of repentance, as in the Jesus Prayer, is not linear Mr. Data.

        It is, among other things, an on-going and living conversation with our Lord that is at the heart of our Sacramental life.

    • This is usually the response one encounters when people try to respond to subjects others introduce out of genuine courtesy, Michael. You dismiss other POVs and now you’re upset with George because he didn’t understand what you meant.

      I suspect this is your way of trying to change the direction of the blog because most of us care who is running our country and you don’t. You once vowed to do exactly this because you didn’t think George was fit to run the blog and said so publically, I might add. A few months before or a few months after, you emphatically stated I was not worth praying for, and you had chosen to pray for my demise instead.

      Something hateful like that.

      Frankly, I don’t see much “change of heart” on your part. The term “disruptor” comes to mind.

      This is a geo-political blog, Michael. And this is why we ask people NOT to preach. If the clergy want to do it to illustrate a point, that’s fine. But as lay people, we are not qualified to preach to others about what they should or shouldn’t do. It’s unabashedly judgemental.

      The Bible contains several passages that address judging others, including: Matthew 7:1–5: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you”. Jesus emphasizes that people should judge themselves before judging others.

      Romans 14:1-4: “Do not judge others, and you will not be judged. For you will be treated as you treat others. The standard you use in judging is the standard by which you will be judged”.

      James 4:11: “Do not criticize one another, my friends”.

      Other scriptures that address judging others include: Mark 4:24–25 and Luke 6:37–42.

      Secondly, no one has an opinion that resonates with you which I suspect you have decided in advance. We throw out some ideas of our own and you say, “No, that’s not it.” George tries to tie it all together, and you accuse him of mischaracterizing what you said and silencing you which implies intent.

      I assure you, George was only trying to help you, as he knows how I feel about these exchanges and the liberties you have taken. He also knows my breaking point.

      There was another person who was once telling the blog how wonderful heaven is because is is there we are connected with our soul mate and other things that might have been misunderstood within an Orthodox context. People started emailing us behind the scenes saying, “Why are you allowing this person to say these things on your blog?” This person probably meant well. There may have been a deeper point, but it caused so much consternation and divisiveness, we made a rule: No preaching.

      We believe that people who want to talk about something else or to someone else, can go somewhere else where their preferred topics are welcomed. Facebook maybe. It will save us a lot of work if you follow our direction, Michael, because this is probably the 10th time I’ve tried to tell you stop talking about “repentance” (privately or by just not posting it) but you ignore me.

      It takes time, as a moderator, to have to wade through these things which I find to be a very unpleasant task with some people.

      We are closing this discussion on repentance until the evening of Great Holy Wednesday, unless it is germain to a topic we’re discussing as a group. Whether you do or others don’t (but you think they should) is not a topic we are willing to explore.

  5. The so-called Compromise of Constantine would later become a theme of the Protestant Reformation. The idea was that St. Constantine compromised Christianity, mixing Christianity with pagan beliefs and Roman politics. Protestant reformers would later contest that the “worship of saints” was merely a substitution for the worship of pagan gods, and that Christian feast days were merely a substitution for pagan holidays. At the same time, if you poke a stick at most any Protestant theologian, they pretty much have to concede that Christology can really only be explained by the Council of Nicea and subsequent Ecumenical Councils.

    Nonetheless,what’s sad is that this idea of the Compromise of Constantine would later be embraced by Roman Catholic and even some Orthodox theologians, although mostly of the Paris school of Russian Orthodox emigres. Father Alexander Schmemann is perhaps the classic example of an Orthodox theologian whose work accepts this idea of the Compromise of Constantine almost as fact. Typical of Fr. Schmemann’s outlines are an avoidance of tradition, attempting instead to reach back to the original forms of the Early Church. It’s the same technique as used by Protestants. The idea is that the original forms of the Early Church were more pure and uncompromised, whereas traditional forms, such as even the “cult of saints”, are seen as suspect and even baggage to be discarded.

      • For an excellent critique of Fr. Alexander Schmeman’s ideology:

        http://orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/schmem_men.aspx

        Here’s a snippet:

        “Father Schmemann, however, reveals the full extent of his dependence on heterodox scholarly prejudices when he writes that after the fourth century there was an excessive emphasis on the veneration of Saints as intercessors before the Throne of God, indicating the ‘eclipse of catholic ecclesiological consciousness’ (Introduction, p. 166), and on the sanctifying power emanating from the Relics of Saints, to the supposed detriment of the early Christian (and Christocentric) tradition that a Martyr or Saint “was first and foremost a witness to the new life and therefore an image of Christ” (Introduction, p. 145). As Father Michael astutely observes, Saints are honored precisely “because in them Christ is glorified”; likewise, we venerate the Icon and Relics of a Saint “guided not by the calculation of receiving a sanctification from them, or some kind of power, a special grace, but by the natural desire of expressing in action our veneration and love for the saint” (p. 98). Needless to say, Father Alexander’s understanding of the veneration of Saints and Holy Relics, at least from a traditional Orthodox way of thinking, is innovative, impious, and wholly at odds with the dogmatic traditions of the Church.”

        • Just as I suspected, you’ve been reading his critics rather than his own actual works in their full and complete context.

          No one is perfect, and I am critical myself of SOME of what he wrote. But I will NOT be critical of the purpose and main thrust of all his works which, far from being a departure from the Tradition, are in fact a call to return to the living Tradition (and away from formalism) as clearly expressed in the Church’s liturgical Tradition and life. And that obviously includes a vast liturgical Tradition of venerating the Saints.

          • The move against formalism was the basis for much of Vatican II. Fr. Schmemann was also present at Vatican II as an observer. It’s perhaps no coincidence then that Fr. Schmemann’s writings would be heavily influenced by such Vatican II theologians as Jean Danielou and Louis Bouyer.

            While there most certainly are patristic sources against formalism, such as the writings of St. Symeon the New Theologian (and really most any of the inspired writings of the Orthodox saints), Fr. Schmemann’s writings are almost devoid of any direct references to saint’s lives and their writings. Instead, he tended to focus on the problematic nature of the Byzantine Church and government, bolstering his argument that the Byzantine-centered Church (that is to say the Compromise of Constantine) had corrupted the Church’s living tradition. It’s really the same argument that Vatican II was making, and we can all see what happened with the Roman Catholics after Vatican II.

    • “The so-called Compromise of Constantine would … be embraced
      by Roman Catholic and even some Orthodox theologians…”

      …whereas the so-to-be-called Compromise of Bartholomew is
      (perhaps) unlikely to be embraced by Orthodox theologians.

      • The documents of the 2016 Crete Council were largely compromised by diplomatic attempts of the EP to reach conciliarity with all the other representatives of the autocephalous churches. However, in regards to Ukrainian autocephaly, the EP has been largely uncompromising.

        • And here’s another reason why:

          * Pope tells grandmother not to ‘insist’ on grandchildren’s baptism *
          https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-tells-grandmother-not-to-insist-on-grandchildrens-baptism/?utm_source=most_recent&utm_campaign=usa

          Michael Haynes, Snr.Vatican Correspondent:

          * Writing to an Italian women concerned for the spiritual wellbeing of her grand-daughter, Pope Francis told her to accompany the child’s parents without ‘insisting’ the children be baptized. *

          VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — Writing to a grandmother distressed about her children’s lack of attention to religion for their own children, Pope Francis told her to “accompany” them but not to insist they baptize their children.

          In the inaugural edition of a new Vatican magazine, Pope Francis downplayed an Italian grandmother’s concerns about her grandchildren not receiving the Sacrament of Baptism. The Pope’s reply came in direct response to a letter from a woman named “Oliva” and will form a regular feature in the magazine.

          Oliva recounted how the youngest of her three grandchildren was “not baptized, because her parents, who were married civilly, drifted away from the Lord during their teenage years.”

          The young girl, now aged five, appears to have remained away from the Church with Oliva recounting that the girl’s parents have “no desire” to “seek Him [God] and make Him present in their lives.”

          Such a scenario, Oliva wrote, “is a source of great suffering for me because I know how important it is to have the Lord by our side, to pray to Him, to listen to Him and to receive His love.”

          “I imagine my granddaughter without this great gift, without the Sacrament of Baptism, she is so curious about the story of Jesus with so many questions of her own. What will Jesus think of all this?” she asked.

          The grandmother wrote that she continued her prayers for the young girl’s parents to return to the practice of the faith and placed her problem before the Pope, seeking his “comfort and advice, confident that the Lord will show us the right way to help our granddaughter.”

          Francis empathized with Oliva, but urged her not to insist that her grand-daughter be baptized.

          He first highlighted baptism as “the door that allows Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to dwell, to take up residence, in our person” and noted the importance of baptizing infants rather than waiting until later life.

          Francis also noted that “Baptism still cannot be imposed on parents who do not want it for their children,” recommending instead that grandparents, “by your example, can open many hearts that seem closed.”

          He urged Oliva to “carry on the dialogue always … with hope, with meekness and with charity.”

          But he specifically also recommended that she did not insist upon the grandchild’s baptism: “Accompany your children, talk to them, but without insisting with the proposal of Baptism. Free love is more persuasive than many words.”

          The Pontiff cited the example of St. Monica and her “unceasing prayers” for the conversion of her son, St. Augustine.

          St. Monica famously prayed for many years for Augustine to return to the practice of his Catholic faith, following him from country to country in order to be near him and attempt to lead him away from his notably non-Catholic lifestyle. After initially intending to cease contact with him due to his abandoning of the faith, St. Monica was given a vision in which she received reassurance that he would return to the faith, which he eventually did many years later.

          The Catholic Church teaches that baptism “is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit,” and the sacrament which makes one a member of the Church. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1213)

          It is a matter of faith, a teaching held de fide, that baptism is necessary for one’s salvation.

          The Catechism of the Council of Trent urges the utmost importance of baptizing children as soon as possible, in the section entitled “Baptism Of Infants Should Not Be Delayed”:

          The faithful are earnestly to be exhorted to take care that their children be brought to the church, as soon as it can be done with safety, to receive solemn Baptism. Since infant children have no other means of salvation except Baptism, we may easily understand how grievously those persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the Sacrament longer than necessity may require, particularly at an age so tender as to be exposed to numberless dangers of death. ‘

    • Gail, forgive me for offending you.
      Please pray for Joy to be in my heart as it seems to be for George and you.

      • I’ll be honest, in today’s climate, it’s a bonafide threat to have someone on your blog who calls what you do “evil,” which you did as recently as a week ago, I believe. Especially when it’s the same person who once accused you of advocating people “get out their guns.” We never said anything even close to that but that didn’t stop you from saying it and putting us a risk. You have said some incredibly hateful things, as well. You’ve insulted George, who is too nice a guy to call you out on it. – You have a dislike for all things “George and Gail” and I am tired of being polite.

        I’m already under attack, Michael. Did you know that? Probably not. I have been having to use incognito to get on the blog and now even that doesn’t work. Did you notice our banner was replaced? We didn’t do that. Whoever has our blog did that. The last time this happened, we lost 20,000 subscribers and a couple of years of our data and I’m on the phone every day with people who can’t figure it out. I have sunk more money than I personally have into this blog and yet we haven’t charged you a dime for coming here for what. . . decades now?

        The people who engage in cyber crimes are dangerous people, Michael. And, unfortunately, we have more than a few dangerous people in the Church. So people like you, who hate us, are a threat. If someone is trying to get on the blog every other day (which you do) to bring attention to their prayer life, it’s probably an indictment. Not something good. And the fact that you’re preoccupied with sending in comments that will never get posted because of your propensity to break our rules, is worrisome. I wonder just how far you would go to hurt us.

        There is no joy for me in what you’re doing. It causes tension between George and me. He is far more lenient when it comes to you. But he doesn’t see everything people write like I do. Only me. I’m not Greek and I’m a woman which makes me an easy target. And whether you know it or not, you’re dealing with a woman who has been through too much and still going through too much to feel any joy when you join in because I’m the one who has to stand up to you to get you to stop.

        I shouldn’t have to. I shouldn’t have to be afraid you’ll say something that will inadvertently get posted and get us in trouble.

        There has never been a time more dangerous than this very moment, which you may not even realize. When we get on the other side of this, you will be so much better off than you ever imagined because there were people out there who took the risks while you sat on the sidelines and faulted them for it.

        Joy comes from doing the right thing.

        And Repentance is more than asking for forgiveness.

        You have to change. Something you don’t want to do. There will be no peace between us unless you stop hating us and everything we stand for.

  7. The earliest manuscripts containing the Gospel of St John long predate this;
    and said Gospel proves that the Divinity of Christ was recognised very early;
    as was so recently shown here on Monomakhos in my study of John 1:1-18

    Nevertheless, it is another welcome illustration of the fact
    for the benefit of those whose faith needs such support.

      • Papyrus P52 (the ‘Rylands Fragment’) is generally agreed
        by scholars to be the earliest New Testament manuscript:
        discovered so far – but that may yet change.

        In any case, see:
        https://biblearchaeologyreport.com/2019/02/15/the-earliest-new-testament-manuscripts/

        ” … the Apostle John likely wrote his gospel sometime late in the first century. This means that P52, the earliest New Testament manuscript, was likely copied within 100 years or so of the original. Moreover, since the manuscript was discovered in Egypt, a significant distance away from Ephesus where the gospel was originally written, we can see that the text of the Bible was being copied and widely circulated already in the second century A.D. “