Archeological Discoveries
Apparently, archeologists in Turkey have discovered the church where the First Council of Nicaea met. Story here
Leaving the thread open so people can also discuss other archeological digs that might have in impact on the faith.
Leaving the thread open so people can also discuss other archeological digs that might have in impact on the faith.
Comments
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a72688579/lost-church-council-of-nicaea/
While I would put a lot of salt on Fox political news, there are other instances where the reporting is reasonable.
We know there was a Council at Nicea. We know it must have met in a building. There was a comment that the earlier church on the site was pretty small so it's 'miraculous' that so many bishops could fit inside it at one time.
Did the Almighty 'shrink' them so that they could all fit inside? Or miraculously expand the size only for it to revert to its former dimensions once the council had finished?
Unless the archaelogical evidence indicates that there could not possibly be 318 bishops present - according to the traditional number - I'm not sure what 'impact' the discovery has on what Christians believe.
Don't get me wrong. I welcome archaelogical investigations but I don't think they necessarily change people's perceptions a great deal. The Dead Sea Scrolls are probably the exception though.
I've seen Orthodox Christian commentators seize on early dates for Christian - and indeed Jewish - wall-paintings to argue that iconography developed earlier than previously thought - or cite inscriptions of early invocations of Mary and the Saints to make a similar point.
I've seen other commentators disagree.
A lot of archaelogical evidence is sketchy and based on surmise. It's generally accepted that there is evidence for what might an early church building at Caerwent in my native South Wales - the Roman Venta Silurum for instance - but it's not been proven in a cast iron way.
It's highly probable that there was but we can't prove it for definite.
One of my recent personal treats was subscribing to "Popular Mechanics" magazine, which (fortunately) defines "mechanics VERY broadly so that it has frequent article on archaeology. Relative to the above, the one titled "Sloth Bones Could Rewrite South American History" is a favorite. But one of the more recent articles is the finding that somebody carved a notch in a wooden timber to fit into another timber---half a million years before Home Sapiens. Interesting, but it doesn't affect my faith in any way.
So God might have been altering, at that Time, And changing, Relative Dimensions In Space?
To the comment that the bishops must have all shrunk, I would point out archeological digs of civilian cemeteries at the time would place men between 5'5' to 5'7' (165 cm to 170cm) and the weight 130 to 150lbs (59-68 kg). In other words, no need to shrink them. They were already small by modern standards.
But, that earliest church structure can be very informative regarding the history of our faith. When was that first building constructed? Does it predate Constantine, and show a faith with followers who were confident enough to build a church while still officially proscribed? What does the layout of the building or any artifacts preserved in the ruins tell us about the faith and worship of that early community? What does the reconstruction of the building after it was destroyed by earthquake tell us about how the community and their worship developed? Is the newer building so much bigger that we know the worshipping community was much larger? Does it incorporate features that reflect significant changes in how the building was used? There are very few early church structures known, many of them are lost under later structures that are themselves so valuable that we're never going to be able to excavate anything more than the tiniest parts of them (if that). Having access to a church building from so early in the history of our faith which is not a current place of worship and accessible to archaeological investigation is rare opportunity to ask such questions and maybe get information to answer them.
If we are going down the 'how many bishops could fit into a small church' route then at 5'6"" I'm pretty small by 'modern' standards - and certainly US standards.
My father was 5'7" and my mother 4'11" so I was hardly going to grow into an Arnold Schwarzenegger.
I've been inside one of the churches where the deliberations for the Council of Trent were held and was surprised that it wasn't a massive basilica. Sure, it was a sizeable space but not gigantic.
I'm not saying it's insignificant that they've found traces of an earlier church building which would have been there at the time the Council of Nicea took place.
Far from it.
It's not as if anyone doubts that the Council took place though nor that it's deliberations weren't immensely significant.
The discovery is certainly fascinating but doesn't 'shape' how we view the Council in theological or historical terms.
'How could all those bishops fit into a space the size of a telephone booth? Perhaps they rang in or joined by Zoom from across the Roman Empire?' 😉
Now, I'm not falling for any "Noah's Ark, Discovered!" headlines anytime soon, but stories like this still intrigue me, back-slidden and deconstructed as I am.
I find this odd, as I was in Nicaea about 20 years ago, and at that time there was the area and remains of the floor of a building that was known as the church where the creed was written.
Hesychasm - and apophatic theology... the real deconstruction. 😉