Freethought & Rationalism Archive

God Fearing Atheist · 01-23-2008, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I think that Acharya S could rewrite her book and retain her central point, while removing the problematic parts and correcting some mistatements of fact, and have a lot more credibility in scholarly areas and the internet debate circuit.

You mean, Acharya would have more credibility in scholarly areas if she were, um, a better scholar?

Frankly, I don't think there would be much of a central point left were she to follow your advice.

Ben C Smith · 01-23-2008, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

To double nitpick.

Virginal Conception is preferable to Virgin Birth. Virgin Birth can refer to the claim that Mary remained physically a virgin after giving birth to Jesus. (See Protevangelium of James and other related material.)

Andrew Criddle

I recall this observation from you before, and actually had it in mind when I wrote my post. But I decided not to go into it and risk confusing matters further. I do agree that this doubly nitpicky distinction is a good one.

Ben.

lpetrich · 01-25-2008, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acharya S

Did Richard Carrier receive his PhD? If so, congratulations are in order.

Not yet, but he's been noting his progress toward that goal in his blog. He recently sent to his professors the first version of his PhD thesis, and he expects to get their responses within a few weeks to a few months. He may then take a few weeks to a few months making whatever revisions that they suggest, and if they like it, he will be done. He will likely get his degree during some degree-conferral period, which will likely be the upcoming May or the upcoming December.

After that, he will publish his thesis in a book, which will be published by some academic publisher, likely in 2009 or perhaps later.

He will then turn his attentions to writing some other books that he has been planning to write; he might write something on Jesus mythicism, perhaps a review of Jesus-myth theories.

Toto · 01-25-2008, 06:47 PM

More specific URL: Dissertation Done

God Fearing Atheist · 01-30-2008, 01:19 PM

Just a little update on the Davies translation of Macrobius' Saturnalia. Page 5, which Acharya refered us to, is part of the introduction. The words Dave quoted are there, but they are Davies', not Macrobius'.

Davies does cite 1.17-23, which makes one wonder why she didn't just give us that.

Jeffrey Gibson · 01-30-2008, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by God Fearing Atheist

Just a little update on the Davies translation of Macrobius' Saturnalia. Page 5, which Acharya refered us to, is part of the introduction. The words Dave quoted are there, but they are Davies', not Macrobius'.

Davies does cite 1.17-23, which makes one wonder why she didn't just give us that.

Are you saying that AS confused a portion of Davies' Introduction to his translation of Macrobius with the text of the translation itself and that she doesn't reproduce Davies' actual translation of the relevant portion of Macrobius?

Jeffrey

God Fearing Atheist · 01-31-2008, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Are you saying that AS confused a portion of Davies' Introduction to his translation of Macrobius with the text of the translation itself and that she doesn't reproduce Davies' actual translation of the relevant portion of Macrobius?

Jeffrey

For the quote that was under discussion anyway, yeah. She may have reproduced Macrobius' words elsewhere, but i'd have to check.

Jeffrey Gibson · 01-31-2008, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by God Fearing Atheist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Are you saying that AS confused a portion of Davies' Introduction to his translation of Macrobius with the text of the translation itself and that she doesn't reproduce Davies' actual translation of the relevant portion of Macrobius?

Jeffrey

For the quote that was under discussion anyway, yeah. She may have reproduced Macrobius' words elsewhere, but i'd have to check.

So how does Davies translate 1.17-23?

Jeffrey

Antipope Innocent II · 01-31-2008, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iasion

Greetings Acharya S,

So nice to see you here again :-)

I see the erroneous "quote" from Pope Leo X
"What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us"
is still up on your web site here :
http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm

Perhaps you've been very busy,
but can you please give us an estimate of when that error will be removed from your web-site?

If you need help with HTML editting, perhaps someone here at IIDB can help?

Let us know...

Iasion

Looks like that comically elementary error still hasn't been corrected.

mountainman · 01-31-2008, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iasion

I see the erroneous "quote" from Pope Leo X
"What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us"

So what scholarship would you point at as the final
pontification of this "erroneous" Pope Leo X quote,
and what convinces you that your source is to be
treated as the final authority in this issue?

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-25-2008, 06:47 PM	#434
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	More specific URL: Dissertation Done

01-30-2008, 01:19 PM	#435
God Fearing Atheist Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Massachusetts, USA -- Let's Go Red Sox! Posts: 1,500	Just a little update on the Davies translation of Macrobius' Saturnalia. Page 5, which Acharya refered us to, is part of the introduction. The words Dave quoted are there, but they are Davies', not Macrobius'. Davies does cite 1.17-23, which makes one wonder why she didn't just give us that.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.