Celsus

He must be busy writing a devastating refutation to our posts. Let's give him some time.

Joel

Peter Kirby

Bump.

Evangelion

I already have. Look at the Josephus quote.

Here it is again:

Now, if you think there's something wrong with that assessment, the onus is on you to prove it.

Evangelion

I didn't claim it was a Christian invention, and you are forgetting that Baruch was composed over time.

While the work on Baruch certainly began in the 3rd or 4th Century BC, the book did not reach its current form until somewhere in the late 1st Century AD. So I'm taking the AD date as the date of the completed book itself.

Sure, you can choose to run with the BC date if you like, but it leaves you with an incomplete Baruch. Is that really what you want to do?

*snip*

We have seen no such thing. I despatched Davies in this post, which is precisely why you narrowed the scope of your argument to a relentless attack on Josephus. Davies is a mere distraction and his argument is spurious. Forget him. It's over and I'm not offering a rematch.

Absolutely no idea and couldn't care less. Next?

You didn't ask for arguments, you merely asked for dates. Arguments to support these dates would require another thread entirely. Let's try and stick to the topic, shall we?

It's pretty simple, m8. If she lived during the time of Ahasuerus (or "Artaxerxes", as the LXX calls him) that puts her in the 5th Century BC. And unless my mathematics is even worse than I fear it to be, the 5th Century BC came before the 3rd Century BC, yes?

Yes?

What on earth is this supposed to mean? The composition of the Wisdom books (a later title anyway) has nothing to do with "schools of wisdom." Can I have something a little more substantial than mere sophistry, please?

It was met with opposition from some quarters because (like Hanukkah) it is a relatively recent institution when compared to the rest of Jewish tradition, being instituted by the Jews themselves, long after the receipt of the Law. This is why it is not considered one of the major feasts of Judaism.

The opposition to which you refer was advanced by Jewish ultra-conservatives on purely sectarian grounds; it had absolutely nothing to do with the legitimacy (or otherwise) of Esther.

Why should there be attestation at Qumran?

You seem to be labouring under the peculiar misapprehension that nothing is valid unless it was attested @ Qumran. But it is well known that the Qumran scrolls did not contain a totally exhaustive array of OT literature, so any argument against Esther on this basis is utterly nonsensical.

Just to drive the point home, here's what you're effectively saying: "Well, if Esther is a legitimately ancient book, why doesn't it appear in this later, incomplete collection of Jewish literature?"

Now, can you understand why I'd reject this objection out of hand?

Ah, so many mistakes... so little time. Where to begin?

Let's start with your blatant misrepresentation of Josephus. He does not say that nothing was written since the time of Artaxerxes.

Here's what he says:

Could it possibly get any clearer? And yet you somehow managed to bungle the entire quote. Wow, I'm impressed.

Now we move on to your objection to my argument that Josephus should be accepted until proven otherwise. Well, what's wrong with that? It's legitimate to presume innnocence until someone is proved guilty, isn't it? And since your repetition of this argument merely underscores your complete lack of evidence against Josephus, I can safely dismiss it as a pointless distraction.

You can't prove Josephus wrong, yet you claim (without evidence) that he is! Amazing! Would you let a Christian do this with evolution? I don't think so. You therefore deserve no special privileges on this score.

Incidentally, if Josephus is wrong, just where is he getting his canon from? Are you now going to claim that he simply made it all up on the spot?

What? And can we have a little more explanation as to why these rabbinical sources are wrong, please?

The standard "I'm an atheist and you're just a measly Christian, so you must accept that I'm right and you're wrong" isn't going to work, sorry. I'm holding you to the same standard that you've imposed on me.

The ancients determined that the voice of God had ceased after the time of Artaxerxes. This was not only prophesied but also demonstrated by objective evidence, since the Law of Moses contained a list of benchmarks for testing the veracity of a prophet, nobody after Artraxerxes' time was able to meet.

Bottom line: the Jews already had a standard for determining when inspiration had ceased, and regardless of whether or not you accept that standard yourself, they did - and closed their canon accordingly.

Well, we have no record of any alternative canon in Josephus' day (and remember, I've already dealt with Jamnia) nor do we have any record of an alternative canon before or after Josephus' day. We do, however, have a record of an authoritative canon matching Josephus' description and a Jewish religious tradition to support it.

If that's not good enough for you, what is?

It's difficult to know exactly what you're claiming here. Are you trying to say that none of these books appeared in the original LXX, but were later additions which appeared after the 3rd Century BC?

If not, what are you saying and why should I care?

I feel we are still talking past each other because you insist on making wild claims without ever substantiating them ("Josephus is wrong! No, really - he just is!") and playing the "modern scholars think" card without any elaboration.

Ah, same old IIDB; same old special pleading.

Evangelion

I last visited this thread on the 3rd of July, 2003. At that time I was under a great deal of pressure from various domestic issues, including chronic illness and severe depression. Astonishing as it may sound, I lost track of the thread after becoming more interested in my personal life than a debate @ IIDB. I trust that you will forgive me for this.

During the period July - October 2003, I...

* sold my house and bought an investment property

* moved from Western Australia to South Australia

* Spent three and a half weeks with my grandparents in Tasmania, helping them prepare for their move to South Australia


During the period October 2003 - January 2004, I...

* sold my car

* resigned from my job @ Australia Post

* moved from South Australia to the UK, where I currently reside


But now I'm back.

And I think I should @ least receive a little credit for picking up the thread after a year's absence, yes?

Evangelion

BTW, I love the forum's new look - but you really should be using Invision Powerboard.

Evangelion

Hi Toto. Remember me?

I remember you...