Replies

Again, there are two Roman Laodicea's. One in Asia, and one in Galatia. The one in Asia is near Colossae. The one in Galatia is near Iconium and Lystra. After the one in Asia was destroyed by an earthquake, do you have any evidence that it was uninhabited? What evidence is there for us to determine which city is referred to?

John to the seven churches which are in Asia. (Rev. 1:4)

We're talking about the great Laodicea of Asia, as indentified in Revelation and many ancient writers, renowned for its wealth and self-satisfaction -- not the five or six other "Laodiceas" founded by Seleucus in memory of his mother (not to mention at least 16 "Antiochs" named after his father).

Good grief, Hermann -- if you woke up tomorrow to screaming headlines announcing "Paris destroyed by asteroid!", you wouldn't think they were talking about Paris, Texas.

Be realistic, for heaven's sake.

best, OP

Again, please cite your secular and archaeological evidence for (1) dating of the second Laodicean Earthquake, (2) evidence that the City was COMPLETELY destroyed and unihabited, (3) date of the rebuilding, (4) evidence that the rebuilding was a reconstruction from nothingness, and not a restoration of continued existence to a better state.

I note the Republic of Turkey cites the date of the abandonment of Laodicea by the Romans due to Earthquake as AD 194.

http://www.kultur.gov.tr/portal/arkeoloji_en.asp?belgeno=2759

"Existence of one of the famous 7 churches of Small Asia in this city shows the importance of Christianity in this city. We don't know the reason why Laodikeia that was established near Goncalý and Eskihisar villages in archaic period was completely left. But, it is not difficult to guess that big earthquakes had a role in this event. A very big earthquake that happened in 194 AD has destroyed the city."

Note some of the other information on this site:

"It lies in southwestern of the city in east - west direction. The additional buildings and gymnasium are constructed so as to constitute a whole. The length of the stadium constructed in 79 AD is 350 m and its width is 60 m. The building, which is constructed in the form of a amphitheater has 24 - step sitting lines. A big part of it is destroyed. An inscription indicating that the gymnasium has been had constructed in 2nd century AD by proconsul Gargilius Antioius and devoted to Emperor Hadrianus and his wife Sabina."

Those dates conflict with your theories of a destroyed city.

It is difficult to even find citations that agree on the dating of the first earthquake. See here, which shows citations dating it as AD 60 and AD 66:

http://www.ucg.org/un/un0208/laodicea.html

Interestingly, this site quotes:

"After having been successively called Diosopolis and Rhoas, it was named Laodicea in honor of Laodice, the wife of Antiochus II (261-246 B.C.), who rebuilt it. It was destroyed by an earthquake (A.D. 66 or earlier) and rebuilt by Marcus Aurelius...The town was located on a flat-topped hill. A wall (about a kilometer long on each of its four sides) surrounded the crown of the hill. Gates pierced this wall on the N, E, and NW. At the SW edge of the plateau stood a stadium, built and dedicated to Vespasian in A.D. 79" (New Unger's Bible Dictionary, 1988, article "Laodicea").

That quotation from the website gives the same citation as you did in #384. Note that the rebuilding under Marcus Auerlius obviously was not of an uninhabited place, since the same article notes the stadium built by Vespasian in AD 79, as noted by the Turkish site. no reason to build a stadium in an unihabited city is there?

I trust the Archaeologists on this a lot more than I trust Preterists with axes to grind and theses to prove. And there does seem to be a lot of confusion in Protestant soruces between this city and Laodicea in Galatia, where the famous Church Council was held in the 4th century, and which remained a Christian city until circa AD 1450.

Ball's in your court OP. Your house of cards is rapidly collapsing as we knock out one support after another of your thesis. There is no archaeological reason to suppose Laodicea was uninhabited post AD 66. In fact, all the evidence is quite to the contrary.