十字架
2018/09/18
《The "Foolishness" of a Crucified Savior 「十字架的救贖主」，在那滅亡的人為愚拙》
※The ancient assessment of crucifixion is seen in the way it was dealt with in their literature.
古代對釘十字架的評價，可以從他們對文獻處理的方式中看出來。
Historians once mistakenly assumed that the scarcity of references to crucifixion in cultured literary sources was proof that it was rarely employed.
歷史學家曾因十字架事件文獻上記載不多，而誤以為歷史上很少施行該刑罰。
More recently it has been determined that the more refined literary artists omitted reference to crucifixion, not because it was unknown, but because they did not want to disgrace or defile their work by mentioning such a vile and obscene practice.
近代，斷言十字架記載文獻缺乏的原因，乃是優雅的作家們，因為這種刑罰非常污穢猥褻，略去提及，以免因此被貼上不知恥而污染了他們的作品。
※In Greek romances and the theatre, crucifixion of the hero/heroine was routine, but in every instance he/she was delivered from the cross and set free.
在希臘浪漫主義和戲劇中，英雄/女主角被釘十字架是常見的，但所有結局，都是他/她被從十字架上拯救出來獲得自由。
In other words, heroes could not on any account be allowed to suffer such a shameful death. This was one reason why the notion of a crucified savior was “foolishness” to the Greeks.
換句話說，英雄不能以任何方式被允許遭受如此可恥的死亡。這就是為什麼「釘在十字架上的救世主的概念」對希臘人來說是「愚蠢」的原因之一。
※Crucifixion was referred to as “crudelissimum taeterrimumque supplicum”, or “that most cruel and disgusting penalty.”
釘十字架刑罰，被稱為“crudelissimum taeterrimumque supplicum”，就是說，釘死十字架，是最殘酷而惹人厭惡的刑罰。
Pliny the Younger (112) called Christianity a “perverse and extravagant superstition” because it preached Christ crucified (Epistulae, 10.96.4-8). Tacitus called it a “pernicious superstition.”
Pliny the Younger稱：宣講十字架是基督教最喪心病狂、最過分的迷信。
Tacitus稱：十字架是惡質的迷信。
| 網友回應 | |
| 尚未登入，無法參與回應 |