Freethought & Rationalism Archive

SlowTrainComing · 07-10-2008, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Because that's not what Josephus himself says about when he wrote The Antiquities. And contrary to what STC claims, 94 is not what is "recorded academically" and is "universally understood to be" the date of the Antiquities' composition.

Any documentation?

Quote:

Bad scholarship is never a side issue when the "scholar" who is mired in it keeps claiming to be superior in his knowledge of the things being discussed.

Jeffrey

Can you refer to the post in which I claimed academic superiority on this or any topic?

Bad scholarship... wow...

Equinox · 07-10-2008, 02:03 PM

OK, Jeff, enlighten me (I don't read greek). What date does Josephus give? Is there a group of scholars who think he wrote it in 94? If so, why?

In either case, as I said, I don't think the 94 issue is the most important thing to disccus here. STC's claim of myriad contemporaneous accounts is a pie in the sky even with it - even if we were to accept the TF and completely original (which is of course silly).

Equinox

SlowTrainComing · 07-10-2008, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

And what besides Wiki are the sources you've seen? Do they include Mason, Feldmann, Thackery, etc. (Do you even know who these fellows are?) Why won't you tell us?

Because it's absolutely irrelevant. You're arguing for the sake of arguing, and I'm not going to play your little game. Show me a shred of evidence that the book was written in a different time period and we'll talk.

SlowTrainComing · 07-10-2008, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equinox

OK, Jeff, enlighten me (I don't read greek). What date does Josephus give? Is there a group of scholars who think he wrote it in 94? If so, why?

In either case, as I said, I don't think the 94 issue is the most important thing to disccus here. STC's claim of myriad contemporaneous accounts is a pie in the sky even with it - even if we were to accept the TF and completely original (which is of course silly).

Equinox

I've provided them. I'm sorry they don't fall into your definition of "contemporaneous," but that's not my problem, nor is it God's.

SlowTrainComing · 07-10-2008, 02:11 PM

I also question why the date of publication is such an issue with you, Jeffrey. How long could he possibly have lived? 80, 90 years? (Extraordinarily unlikely, but still.) The latest it could have been written/published is, what, the early-to-mid 120s or so (which itself stretches to the very brink of impossibility, given life expectancies in that time)? Why would that be such a gross difference from the 94 which I (and the rest of the academic world) claim?

This is why I accuse you of arguing for the sake of argument, a game which I'm not going to play. You repeatedly present me with an irrelevant question and scoff when I refuse to answer it, as though it proves something.

Jeffrey Gibson · 07-10-2008, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlowTrainComing

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

You are not being attacked. You are being asked to do what scholarly discourse obliges you to do when you assert something, and especially when you assert it as apodictically as you have done and when you lay claim, as you most certainly did, to possession of global knowledge of where scholarship stands on the issues you are making claims about - i.e., to back up your claims.

Can you or can't you?

Jeffrey

You're asking me to quote my sources that claim the book was written around 93-94 A.D., correct?

Yes (ignoring that you've now shifted from 94 as the date the sources "you have seen" stated was the exact date of composition to "around 93-94") and not just to quote them, but to tell us who the authors of your "sources" are and where/in what works the quotes of these sources originally appeared/were published.

But I am also asking how you know, as you claimed you did, that "it is recorded academically and universally understood that Antiquities of the Jews" was written in 94 CE when it is becoming increasingly apparent that, despite your implicit claims to be well informed on matters Josephan, you are unfamiliar with the work of those who are "academically recorded" as, and universally understood to be, the best Josephan scholars of the 20th and 21st century.

Quote:

if that's the case, I will happily post them. But I would like to know what that will accomplish.

We'll get to see what sort of things you base your claims on, where you do your research, and whether or not you have any critical acumen in sorting good sources from bad ones.

Quote:

When do you think the book was written/published?

I've already told you in the quote from Josephus himself that I gave you. Why have you not taken that quote into account?

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson · 07-10-2008, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlowTrainComing

I also question why the date of publication is such an issue with you, Jeffrey. How long could he possibly have lived? 80, 90 years? (Extraordinarily unlikely, but still.) The latest it could have been written/published is, what, the early-to-mid 120s or so (which itself stretches to the very brink of impossibility, given life expectancies in that time)? Why would that be such a gross difference from the 94 which I (and the rest of the academic world) claim?

This is why I accuse you of arguing for the sake of argument, a game which I'm not going to play. You repeatedly present me with an irrelevant question and scoff when I refuse to answer it, as though it proves something.

Ah yes. Characterizing questions instead of answering them. The classic dodge of someone who wants to hide the fact that he cannot back up his claims.

Jeffrey

Equinox · 07-10-2008, 02:23 PM

STC, did you notice that my post #112 was addressed to Jeff, not you (or are you a Jeff too?). you are welcome to answer it, but it really wasn't in opposition to your points.

Jeff, I know you supplied the quote, but we don't read greek. Just post the translation for us plebians, thanks. Let' not make things harder than they have to be. I'm another non-believer and sorry, I missed the translation if you posted it.

Everyone - I'm afraid I'll be gone camping for the weekend. Unless I discover an internet tree, I'll see y'all next week.>

<

Have a fun weekend-

Equinox

Jeffrey Gibson · 07-10-2008, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlowTrainComing

I also question why the date of publication is such an issue with you, Jeffrey. How long could he possibly have lived? 80, 90 years? (Extraordinarily unlikely, but still.) The latest it could have been written/published is, what, the early-to-mid 120s or so (which itself stretches to the very brink of impossibility, given life expectancies in that time)? Why would that be such a gross difference from the 94 which I (and the rest of the academic world) claim?

I note once more that you have yet to show that "the rest of the academic world" (you are claiming membership?) does indeed claim this.

Why is that?

Quote:

This is why I accuse you of arguing for the sake of argument, a game which I'm not going to play. You repeatedly present me with an irrelevant question and scoff when I refuse to answer it, as though it proves something.

Dodge two.

What happened to "I will gladly provide my sources"?

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson · 07-10-2008, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equinox

STC, did you notice that my post #112 was addressed to Jeff, not you (or are you a Jeff too?). you are welcome to answer it, but it really wasn't in opposition to your points.

Jeff, I know you supplied the quote, but we don't read greek. Just post the translation for us plebians, thanks.

If you don't mind, I'll let STC translate it for you. After all, he's the one claiming expertise and superior knowledge on matters Josephan.

Jeffrey

07-10-2008, 02:23 PM	#118
Equinox Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Michigan, USA Posts: 897	STC, did you notice that my post #112 was addressed to Jeff, not you (or are you a Jeff too?). you are welcome to answer it, but it really wasn't in opposition to your points. Jeff, I know you supplied the quote, but we don't read greek. Just post the translation for us plebians, thanks. Let' not make things harder than they have to be. I'm another non-believer and sorry, I missed the translation if you posted it. Everyone - I'm afraid I'll be gone camping for the weekend. Unless I discover an internet tree, I'll see y'all next week.>< Have a fun weekend- Equinox

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

07-10-2008, 02:03 PM	#112
Equinox Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Michigan, USA Posts: 897	OK, Jeff, enlighten me (I don't read greek). What date does Josephus give? Is there a group of scholars who think he wrote it in 94? If so, why? In either case, as I said, I don't think the 94 issue is the most important thing to disccus here. STC's claim of myriad contemporaneous accounts is a pie in the sky even with it - even if we were to accept the TF and completely original (which is of course silly). Equinox

07-10-2008, 02:11 PM	#115
SlowTrainComing Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Tennessee Posts: 371	I also question why the date of publication is such an issue with you, Jeffrey. How long could he possibly have lived? 80, 90 years? (Extraordinarily unlikely, but still.) The latest it could have been written/published is, what, the early-to-mid 120s or so (which itself stretches to the very brink of impossibility, given life expectancies in that time)? Why would that be such a gross difference from the 94 which I (and the rest of the academic world) claim? This is why I accuse you of arguing for the sake of argument, a game which I'm not going to play. You repeatedly present me with an irrelevant question and scoff when I refuse to answer it, as though it proves something.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.