Aquila Pacis

I've been working from 6 this morning, with about 2 1/2 hours of sleep, so I don't know if I will be able to post something substantial. But I'll try to say a few general things. First of all, I'm a "he" , and secondly I think there is still some use in continuing this debate. I for myself have started reading into literature that has nothing to do with Carotta's theory, and it's good that people like Amaleq13 and Vorkosigan are questioning Carotta's findings, because it forces me to look a little deeper. You should do the same, Juliana. As I said earlier, the book is almost too good to be true, and I'm for instance thankful that Vorko started criticising the Parable of the Sower. I have looked into it and this chapter in Carotta's book is more than shaky, for several other reasons than the percentage error (or joke?). But I have to post this at some later time.

To return briefly to Eliah: according to Carotta, "Iulius" hides behind that name. (I will have to look up all the instances that he mentions.)

To quote Carotta's short paragraph on Jairus' daughter:

"Jairus' daughter and the hemorrhaging woman are the same person, namely Julius' daughter Julia who at first had swooned and miscarried when she saw the blood-stained toga of her husband Pompeius who had been slightly wounded during a political rally. Later she died in childbirth and her newborn daughter only survived her by a few days. This tragedy was commonly regarded as the cause for the falling-out between Caesar and Pompeius and thus for the ensuing civil war, because now there was no common heir of Caesar and Pompeius, whose new wife, moreover, belonged to the family of Sulla and with that to the opposing party. The report of Mark (5.21-43) corresponds to reality in so far as Caesar's daughter survived her first premature birth, and the baby daughter born later did not (immediately) die. This section, together with the pericopes developed from the story of Publius Clodius (the healing of the leper, the healing of the lame man and the calling of Levi), belongs to the time prior to the Rubicon/Jordan, and thus in the time before the start of the civil war and therefore to an episode originally preceding the Gospel, or to an excursus. [note 642]"

Note 642: "Plut. Caes. 45 and parallel traditions. The peg for inserting the excursus at this place, after the healing of the possessed (i.e. after Dyrrhachium and Pharsalos), would have been the new wife of Pompeius, Cornelia. She was a musician, and hence this could have been the reason for Caesar's ridicule of Pompeius' horsemen, who were from the young aristocracy, in his speech to his soldiers before the battle of Pharsalos as dancers. So the "dancers" would have evoked Cornelia and Cornelia Julia."

Not very elaborate. I will have to read the pericope in Mark again, but I don't think this is sufficient to fully explain the transition from a Caesarean source.

Juliana

All I said was that I am not going to debate with V. anymore. I'm leaving that to you . For the reason, see the whole of this thread and again his last response about the "yammerhead". I am used to discussing with people who are civilized and know what they are talking about.

Are you refering to the whole chapter 'Words and Wonders' or just the section 'Signs and Parables' as "more than shaky"? Please provide examples for what you think is shaky.

Juliana

No. If what you have seen so far has not aroused your curiousity enough to investigate for yourself, then so be it. This is an infidels' forum and I am not a missionary who sees you as a potential convert. I must say however, that when I read through the threads here I sometimes get a feeling that some enlightenment would do no harm, no offense.

Allow me to add a little note, why I don't think your position as moderator is irrelevant here in this forum.
I assume that you and the other moderators and also some of the experts like the "guru" spin are being paid for your job here. Correct me if I'm wrong.
So it is not unreasonable to suspect that whoever it is that owns this forum might potentially have an hidden agenda. This is to say, it is conceivable that the employees might be expected to take up a certain stance on things, encouraging some opinions (to the liking of the boss) and discouring (maybe even ridiculing) others accordingly.
And actually when one looks e.g. at this thread which suggests a new, unconventional idea this is what can be observed. (Look at your earlier posts). As others have noted also in another thread there is a certain climate of fear and oppression being created here, be it by the more sophisticated spin or by the notorious barker Vorkosigan.
I think this has an effect on many readers here who are lurking in the background and maybe find this topic interesting but do not dare to say something because they feel it might not be opportune to the prevailing expressed opinion of the old bulls here. An example for this is the immediate reaction of V. on the remark by Clivedurdle that:
"Someone comes along and argues that there might be important underlying factors and they seem to be rejected out of hand, instead of sifting what they are arguing, and changing theories as needed.", cf. page 9 of this thread.
Immediately comes the response from the great V. that "That comment is unbelievable." because HE has blogged, blablabla. And there is silence again.
I hope I expressed myself clearly, make of this what you want.

Amaleq13

What I have seen so far has dampened my initial curiosity about the theory since I tend to assume that what has been discussed here represents the strongest arguments/points from Carotta's theory.

You are wrong. The moderators are volunteers and spin is not paid to post here though I'm sure he would be open to the idea. At least one professional scholar has been paid by a member to specifically address a particular subject but I believe this was indicated in the thread. Other than that, nobody is making any money off IIDB to my knowledge.

I can't speak for anyone else but I won't hesitate to voice my disagreement with anyone's posts. I've disagreed with both spin and Vorkosigan on various subjects (but only when they are wrong.)

If you believe the rules have been violated, report the post or start a complaint thread. As far as I'm concerned, some people are claiming "fear and oppression" to distract from the fact that they are incapable of defending their claims with credible, rational arguments.

I also think there is a saying about heat and kitchens that is appropriate for such individuals.

Well, I am still interested in an answer to my questions:

Could you offer a specific example or two where Carotta's explanation for the origin of a given passage is clearly more simple than the generally accepted understanding?

Does Carotta ever provide known examples of these same errors by scribes? IOW, are there any examples of the same mistakes Carotta suggests have taken place in contemporary works? Or are these mistakes unique to the creation of the Gospels?

Toto

You are so wrong. But thanks - I needed the laugh.

:rolling:

The secular web is a non-profit organization run, like all non-profits, by a Board of Directors. There is no hidden agenda - it is all out in the open.

The Board is so certain that our basic beliefs are correct and that free inquiry will show this that we have moderators who are self-professed Christians.

Juliana

You're welcome! You know what they say over here in good Ol' Europe:

Laughing is healthy!

:rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Juliana

How about these for a start? They are not exactly from scribes but the Evanglists of Mark were no erudite scholars either.


Catholic Elementary School Test

The following statements about the Bible were written by children. They have not been retouched nor corrected. (i. e., incorrect spelling has been left in).

1. In the first book of the bible, Guinessis. God got tired of creating the world so he took the sabbath off.

2. Adam and Eve were created from an Apple tree. Noah's wife was called Joan of Ark. Noah built an ark and the animals came on in pears.

3. Lots wife was a pillar of salt during the day, but a ball of fire during the night.

4. The Jews were a proud people and throughout history they had trouble with unsympathetic Genitals.

5. Sampson was a strongman who let himself be led astray by a Jezebel like Delilah.

6. Samson slayed the Philistines with the axe of the Apostles.

7. Moses led the Jews to the Red sea where they made unleavened bread which is bread without any ingredients.

8. The Egyptians were all drowned in the dessert, Afterwards, Moses went up to Mount Cyanide to get the ten ammendments.

9. The first commandment was when Eve told Adam to eat the apple.

10. The seventh Commandment is thou shalt not admit adultery.

11. Moses died before he ever reached Canada . Then Joshua led the Hebrews in the battle of Geritol.

12. The greates miricle in the bible is when Joshua told his son to stand

still and he obeyed him.

13. David was a Hebrew king who was skilled at playing the liar. He fought the Finkelsteins, a race of people who lived in bibical times.

14. Solomon, one of Davids sons, had 300 wives and 700 porcupines.

15. When Mary heard she was the mother of Jesus, she sang the Magna Carta.

16. When the three wise guys from the east side arrived, they found Jesus in the manager.

17. Jesus was born because Mary had an immaculate contraption.

18. St. John the blacksmith dumped water on his head.

19. Jesus enunciated the Golden Rule, which says to do unto others before they do one to you. He also explained, a man doth not live by sweat alone.

20. It was a miricle when Jesus rose from the dead and managed to get the tombstone off the entrance.

21. The people who followed the lord were called the 12 decibels.

22. The epistels were the wives of the apostals.

23. One of the oppossums was St. Matthew who was also a taximan.

24. St. Paul cavorted to christianity, he preached holy acrimony, which is another name for marraige.

25. Christians have only one spouse. This is called monotony.

Considering that the language of the Gospels is admittedly humble (SACRAE SCRIPTVRAE SERMO HVMILIS), are you sure, that similar misunderstandings have never taken place in the process of copying and passing them down?

Amaleq13

They aren't even a start. I'm assuming you understand the difference between the list you posted and evidence that would actually serve to support Carotta's claims. Is that difference not clear to you?

Those who make a claim have the burden of supporting it. Carotta claims that certain specific scribal errors have taken place in copying the story of Caesar and I'm asking about the existence of support for the claim.

Does Carotta offer examples of the same scribal errors from other literature or are the errors he suggests unique to the Gospels?

Are these common errors that are discussed by scholars or are they unique errors that have no parallels?

Is there a pattern to the errors that would connect them to a single copyist?

Chris Weimer

Very unique. In no other document of Julius filius divi do we come with Iesus dei. Inconceivable. But worry not! I have Jesus was Caesar and am preparing my tour de force against it.

spin

Holy shite, why didn't I think of that?




Guru