FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-04-2009, 04:07 PM   #81
avi
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Location: eastern North America
Posts: 1,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StudentDon
If Dave31 was actually here to try to convince us that Acharya was right, he would be providing some cites for the more surprising claims, esp the more questionable ones, like a "crucified Horus" or "crucified Krishna". Wouldn't that drive a lot of people to her books if he provided such cites? So why doesn't he do it?

Avi, can you think of any good reason why Dave -- if he is convinced that Acharya is right about specific topics like a "crucified Horus" and "crucified Krishna" -- doesn't give out the specific references that support those surprising claims? If you can, please present it.
No, GD, I cannot think of any reason, good or bad, why Dave does not signal which reference in particular sustains the "crucified Horus" suggestion. I hope he will. I am asking him to please accommodate your request, which strikes me, at least, as very reasonable.

If Dave wishes to criticize me, for not carefully reading AS' article, to locate the reference by myself, I plead GUILTY as charged....

Notwithstanding my own incompetence, Dave, can you please assist us, and move this thread forward, by accommodating G'Dan's request?

Thank you.
avi
avi is offline  
Old 12-04-2009, 04:36 PM   #82
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Lebanon, OR, USA
Posts: 16,829
Default

I checked on AS's list of sources, and it seems to me that she's grotesquely overstating the importance of astronomical motifs. She ought to bear in mind that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
lpetrich is offline  
Old 12-05-2009, 05:19 PM   #83
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avi View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by StudentDon
If Dave31 was actually here to try to convince us that Acharya was right, he would be providing some cites for the more surprising claims, esp the more questionable ones, like a "crucified Horus" or "crucified Krishna". Wouldn't that drive a lot of people to her books if he provided such cites? So why doesn't he do it?

Avi, can you think of any good reason why Dave -- if he is convinced that Acharya is right about specific topics like a "crucified Horus" and "crucified Krishna" -- doesn't give out the specific references that support those surprising claims? If you can, please present it.
No, GD, I cannot think of any reason, good or bad, why Dave does not signal which reference in particular sustains the "crucified Horus" suggestion. I hope he will. I am asking him to please accommodate your request, which strikes me, at least, as very reasonable.

If Dave wishes to criticize me, for not carefully reading AS' article, to locate the reference by myself, I plead GUILTY as charged....

Notwithstanding my own incompetence, Dave, can you please assist us, and move this thread forward, by accommodating G'Dan's request?

Thank you.
avi
Thanks for that, avi.
GakuseiDon is offline  
Old 12-05-2009, 08:00 PM   #84
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
Default

JW:
This post is not for Dave31 but for anyone who is wondering what AS' basis was for writing:

The Nativity Scene of Amenhotep III at Luxor

Quote:
[bold text AS']
Carrier has mistakenly dealt with the substantially different Hatshepsut text (Brunner's "IV D"), demonstrating an egregious error in garbling the cycles
JW:
First of all, to put this charge in perspective, despite having written entire books dealing with the subject, AS did not know that there was any text associated with the Scenes, had no knowledge of the scene she claims Dr. Carrier confused and did not know of the comparable Hatshepsut scenes until she read Dr. Carrier's article which he wrote after receiving Brunner's book from me and skimming it.

AS' evidence that Dr. Carrier confused Brunner's translation of Hatshepsut's scene "D", with the related scene at Luxor "L", is as follows:

AS confesses that Brunner's translation of L here is:

Quote:
He found her, as she rested in the interior of her palace. She awoke because of the god's scent, and she laughed at His Majesty. He went immediately to her, he was passionately in love with her; he let her see him in his Godliness, after he had come in front of her, so that she rejoiced at the sight of his perfection; his love (it) went into her body. The palace was flooded with God-scent, and all his aromas were (such as) out of Punt.
She than notes that the difference between L and D here is:

Quote:
Indeed, the Luxor inscription is lacking two important passages found in the Hatshepsut text that could be considered "erotic" but hardly constitute "soft-core porn": "he gave his heart to her" ("er gab sein Herz zu ihr hin") (IV D a) and "she kissed him" ("[sie] küßte [ihn]") (IV D d).(8) In the Luxor inscription, there is no kissing or giving of the heart.(8a)
So in summary AS confesses that L and D both have (based on her less sexual translations):

1) "He went immediately to her"

2) "he was passionately in love with her"

3) "he let her see him in his Godliness"

4) "he had come in front of her"

5) "she rejoiced at the sight of his perfection"

6) "his love (it) went into her body"

7) "The palace was flooded with God-scent"

and that the overall context are the circumstances of Amenhotep's conception and birth and an accompanying picture that most commentators have described as Amun and the mother on a bed.

Even though she accepts that D is also a source for the Christian infancy narratives and most commentators consider it a source for L, because D also has:

1) "he gave his heart to her"

2) "she kissed him"

which is exactly the mushee stuff we'd expect for a female, AS concludes that Dr. Carrier's source for his conclusion of a sexual encounter here must be D and can not be L.

As for Dave31, in contrast to his accusations of dishonesty of others, I do not think that dishonesty is the source of his problems here.



Josephut

ErrancyWiki
JoeWallack is offline  
Old 12-06-2009, 09:49 AM   #85
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
Default

JW:
I'll add to my previous post that while AS has not provided any specific quote of Dr. Carrier which could only be found in Brunner's IV D (as opposed to IV L), AS does quote Dr. Carrier as follows:

The Nativity Scene of Amenhotep III at Luxor

Quote:
[bold = JW]
At any rate, the couple relax after "getting it on," and the god tells her in bed that she is impregnated and will bear his son, Amenophis. To be more exact, the Queen inadvertently chooses the name by telling Amun she loves him, which is what "Amenophis" means.
which could only be found in Brunner's IV L since "son" and "Amenophis" refer to Amenhotep III and could not refer to IV D which refers to the female Hatshepsut.



Joseph

ErrancyWiki
JoeWallack is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:34 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.