Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chaucer · 02-18-2010, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

That is exactly the opposite of what I'm saying. Pilate's use of the word "legomenou" is indeed effectively neutral. And the fact that both the ultimately unsympathetic Pilate in Chapter 27 and the relatively sympathetic narrator in Chapter 1 both use "legomenou" shows the ultimate neutrality of the term in the first place.

Chaucer

You probably should have used another word besides "disinterested". I mean, I might as well say someone using the word "the" is being disinterested.

Well, "the" is certainly a neutral word. "Disinterest" is the term first used by a Mr. N___, an atheist not on this board whose privacy I have to respect.

Chaucer

ynquirer · 02-18-2010, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

As an important administrator of the Empire under two emperors, you need to find a better example. Your examples (of famous siblings) support my contention that James as the brother of "him called Christ" is a dead giveaway.

No, I don't need to. Pallas' example is perfect. How many people do you think to know, say, in Iraq who Henry Kissinger was? In the late first century, with Jewish education focused on the holy books it must have been much worse.

Quote:

Matthew's repeated use of the term is not a supposition. You need to address it - e.g. by showing one or more examples from the time of Josephus to confirm that this appellation would have understandable to a Jewish audience as singularly identifying the gospel Jesus of Nazareth.

Nor do I need to address such a poor argument as overlooks that it could possibly be Matthew that quoted Josephus.

andrewcriddle · 02-18-2010, 11:37 AM

FWIW legomenou does seem to have a meaning so-called in the standard lexicon see perseus legomenou

click on LSJ in
λέγω2 collect
(Show lexicon entry in LSJ Middle Liddell Slater) (search)

Quote:

ὁ λεγόμενος γραῶν ὕθλος the so-called . . , Id.Tht.176b; “οἱ λ. αὐτόνομοι εἶναι” X.HG6.3.8

Andrew Criddle

Chaucer · 02-19-2010, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

FWIW legomenou does seem to have a meaning so-called in the standard lexicon see perseus legomenou

click on LSJ in
λέγω2 collect
(Show lexicon entry in LSJ Middle Liddell Slater) (search)

Quote:

ὁ λεγόμενος γραῶν ὕθλος the so-called . . , Id.Tht.176b; “οἱ λ. αὐτόνομοι εἶναι” X.HG6.3.8

Andrew Criddle

Thank you,

Chaucer

Toto · 02-19-2010, 12:48 PM

Christian think tank

Quote:

Summary:

Legomenus was apparently used of general naming. It denoted to a common or accepted way of referring to someone. "X the son of Y" or "X, who is also called Y" were common statements.

It denoted public statement and did NOT attempt to determine the accuracy or inaccuracy of the 'name'.

In some cases, this 'alleged' aspect of the verb is highlighted--the disparaging use as 'so-called' attests to this.

But - the "disparaging" uses of the term include Pilate in Matthew, which assumes what is attempted to be proven. The overwhelming use of the term is simply "called."

And I see that Chaucer or his double has posted the same question here where Martin notes

that Josephus used the term "called" very rarely for humans. Esau is a case in point: He is hairy at birth, so the his father calls the newborn baby Esau / "the hairy one". After that he's never "called" Esau. He *is* Esau.

So among those examples there are only two persons, "Ptolemy, surnamed Mennaeus" and "Jesus, who was called Christ". There are other examples outside my little sample. of course, but if anything I'd say the rare use of the word "called", marks "Jesus, who was called Christ" as strange.

Solo · 02-19-2010, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

... And BTW, what you first said about "fundies" also carries the more general implication that any atheist at all who is an historicist for any reason -- never mind Josephus and the whole "legomenou" question -- is automatically a fundamentalist. I wonder what plenty of atheists here who are historicists for their own reasons would say about that. If that isn't a slur, I'd like to know what is.

Chaucer

Just so the lurkers here are clear about your special brand of logic, here is what I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

It has been argued lamely by the fundies that the turn of phrase "so-called Christ" is really a mark of disrespect by Josephus.

There is no implication whatsoever regarding atheists in the statement I made. It was simply a comment on a passage from G.A.Wells (The Historical Evidence for Jesus (or via: amazon.co.uk), Prometheus, 1988, p. 211). But yes, naturally, if you can show me a published title by an 'atheist' arguing along the same lines, I will be pleased to revise my sentence to read 'by the fundies and atheist hotheads alike'.

Jiri

John Kesler · 02-19-2010, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The character of Pilate in the gospels is completely at variance with the his character in Philo and Josephus, to the point that later Christians turned Pilate into a secret Christian sympathizer and made his wife a saint.

There is this tidbit that made its way into Luke's gospel, however:

Quote:

Luke 13:1
At that very time there were some present who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.

Solo · 02-19-2010, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ynquirer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Matthew's repeated use of the term is not a supposition. You need to address it - e.g. by showing one or more examples from the time of Josephus to confirm that this appellation would have understandable to a Jewish audience as singularly identifying the gospel Jesus of Nazareth.

Nor do I need to address such a poor argument as overlooks that it could possibly be Matthew that quoted Josephus.

...who, (as the top notch scholastics argued when they found out what Origen said), wrote the phrase in spite of himself, .....by a miracle.

Jiri

Chaucer · 02-19-2010, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Christian think tank

Quote:

Summary:

Legomenus was apparently used of general naming. It denoted to a common or accepted way of referring to someone. "X the son of Y" or "X, who is also called Y" were common statements.

It denoted public statement and did NOT attempt to determine the accuracy or inaccuracy of the 'name'.

In some cases, this 'alleged' aspect of the verb is highlighted--the disparaging use as 'so-called' attests to this.

But - the "disparaging" uses of the term include Pilate in Matthew, which assumes what is attempted to be proven. The overwhelming use of the term is simply "called."

And I see that Chaucer or his double has posted the same question here where Martin notes

that Josephus used the term "called" very rarely for humans. Esau is a case in point: He is hairy at birth, so the his father calls the newborn baby Esau / "the hairy one". After that he's never "called" Esau. He *is* Esau.

So among those examples there are only two persons, "Ptolemy, surnamed Mennaeus" and "Jesus, who was called Christ". There are other examples outside my little sample. of course, but if anything I'd say the rare use of the word "called", marks "Jesus, who was called Christ" as strange.

"Rare" is not nonexistent.

Chaucer

ApostateAbe · 02-19-2010, 02:32 PM

"This man was called Adam, which in the Hebrew tongue signifies one that is red..." AJ 1.1

"For Gomer founded those whom the Greeks now call Galatians, [Galls,] but were then called Gomerites." AJ 1.6

"There is also a mark of their ancient denomination still to be shown; for there is even now among them a city called Mazaca, which may inform those that are able to understand, that so was the entire nation once called." AJ 1.6

"...who are now called by the Greeks Rheginians. So did Riphath found the Ripheans, now called Paphlagonians." AJ 1.6

"...for the Ethiopians, over whom he reigned, are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Chusites." AJ 1.6

"...but the name it has now has been by change given it from one of the sons of Mesraim, who was called Lybyos." AJ 1.6

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

02-19-2010, 02:32 PM	#50
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	"This man was called Adam, which in the Hebrew tongue signifies one that is red..." AJ 1.1 "For Gomer founded those whom the Greeks now call Galatians, [Galls,] but were then called Gomerites." AJ 1.6 "There is also a mark of their ancient denomination still to be shown; for there is even now among them a city called Mazaca, which may inform those that are able to understand, that so was the entire nation once called." AJ 1.6 "...who are now called by the Greeks Rheginians. So did Riphath found the Ripheans, now called Paphlagonians." AJ 1.6 "...for the Ethiopians, over whom he reigned, are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Chusites." AJ 1.6 "...but the name it has now has been by change given it from one of the sons of Mesraim, who was called Lybyos." AJ 1.6

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.