spin

This is fantasy unrelated to the evidence. Look at the reference to the consuls in AJ 14.14.5 (14.389).


spin

spin

The other Matthias was executed on the same day as the eclipse. The text doesn't say that the high priest was dethroned that same day.


spin

judge

Doesn't have to be the exactly the same day for the argument put forward to work.

You need to maove it far enough for the fast day to be included in his serive time.

As both matthias's were punished for the same action it is reasonable to see the punishments happening concurrently

Steven Avery

Have a good weekend, Judge.

Before you go .. I do wonder if you had noticed (I just learned today) that we have to do CTC .. Carrier Textual Criticism .. on his "Take the 5th" Edition of the Nativity.

Apparently one version was 'smoothed' .. while the earlier version had the Megillath Ta’anith unclarity and dubious case sans detail or footnote (later seen as a blunder when we found more coherent references) that you picked up. The scribes had not destroyed the errant copy. Sometimes the archives and google and other copyists help us to restore a Carrier palpimpsest.

More seriously, it is strange that an argument would be given as significant in his behalf and then we find it simply expunged completely from the discussion .. apparently Richard Carrier found that the argument works the other way and rather than try to deal with the new reality forthrightly the aspiring skeptic professional apologist historian decided that the scissors was the better path than candor.

Shalom,
Steven

judge

I'll probably have to look next week. But to be fair perhaps Richard has another view on this. It's amazing how there is always two sides to any story. Perhaps he just erred, without realising what he had done, if you are right.
I've done that plenty of time myself.
He has demonstrated that he is willing to listen to others ideas and make changes where appropriate. I dont think anyone can ask any more than that from someone.

Have a good weekend yourself.

Steven Avery

Thanks. From the time difference you must be in kiwi-land or vegemite land or something . Ahh I see Bondi is Sydney area.

spin

You need to reread the text. Josephus has inserted some information (indicated in red below) into the text as background to the high priest Matthias. That material is not in chronological order, but inserted for its connection with Matthias:

AJ 17.6.4 (17.164-166) Whiston:
4. But the people, on account of Herod's barbarous temper, and for fear he should be so cruel and to inflict punishment on them, said what was done was done without their approbation, and that it seemed to them that the actors might well be punished for what they had done. But as for Herod, he dealt more mildly with others but he deprived Matthias of the high priesthood, as in part an occasion of this action, and made Joazar, who was Matthias's wife's brother, high priest in his stead. Now it happened, that during the time of the high priesthood of this Matthias, there was another person made high priest for a single day, that very day which the Jews observed as a fast. The occasion was this: This Matthias the high priest, on the night before that day when the fast was to be celebrated, seemed, in a dream, to have conversation with his wife; and because he could not officiate himself on that account, Joseph, the son of Ellemus, his kinsman, assisted him in that sacred office. But Herod deprived this Matthias of the high priesthood, and burnt the other Matthias, who had raised the sedition, with his companions, alive. And that very night there was an eclipse of the moon.

You can remove the part in read and get the historical continuity.

How much time passed between the time Matthias was appointed, AJ 17.4.2 (17.78), and the time he was dethroned AJ 17.6.4 (17.166)? How do you tell which fast and when it was?


spin

judge

We've been over this. Check post #182.

spin

No we haven't. Did you read your own post? Did you read the complaint that I made two messages ago, as to being able to state when the particular fast actually was? You haven't established when Matthias was made high priest -- did he reign for only a year?? --, therefore you cannot, until you do, hope to give the limits of when the particular fast was. Get it? Good. Try again and be more attentive.

If you think I have not dealt with the issue, please quote from your source exactly what it is so that it is clear. Don't point me back to a post of yours which doesn't even deal with a specific year.


ETA: And until you can supply what your source's references actually say, they are pretty useless as references, aren't they? Given the questionable nature generally of the source material as presented, you need to be able to provide the original sources.

Here's the question:

How much time passed between the time Matthias was appointed, AJ 17.4.2 (17.78), and the time he was dethroned AJ 17.6.4 (17.166)? How do you tell which fast and when it was?

How about an answer? Was Matthias appointed in 6BCE? When was he appointed and how do you know which fast was involved in the dream issue?


spin

judge

Spin if you would just go back and read the previous posts and follow the links you will find your answer.






I posted this and gave you the reference in post #175