|  | Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. | 
|  04-21-2012, 06:25 PM | #121 | |
| Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area 
					Posts: 40,549
				 |   Quote: 
 Ehrman's statement is not precise, but he did seem to dispute the idea that the Romans kept records of births and deaths. I suspect he would like to rewrite that sentence. I have a Kindle for PC version, and a search on a few key terms does not show any other place where Ehrman discusses Roman record keeping. I suspect that is sufficiently outside his area of expertise that he does not in fact know the details of Roman vital statistics, birth records, etc. | |
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 06:26 PM | #122 | 
| Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia 
					Posts: 5,714
				 |   
			
			Surely he is referring to "detailed records" here. What claim is Ehrman responding to? If it is to a mythicist book claiming that "Romans kept detailed records of everything", then Ehrnan's comment makes sense.
		 | 
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 06:31 PM | #123 | |
| Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area 
					Posts: 40,549
				 |   Quote: 
 The reason this is not a good argument is not that Romans records weren't good enough, but that after 2000 years, most of the records have not survived. | |
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 06:47 PM | #124 | ||
| Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia 
					Posts: 5,714
				 |   Quote: 
 Correct me if I'm wrong, but Carrier appears to be extrapolating this to a general comment about Romans throughout the Roman world. | ||
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 06:49 PM | #125 | ||
| Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar 
					Posts: 11,866
				 |   Quote: 
 Vorkosigan | ||
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 07:04 PM | #126 | 
| Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area 
					Posts: 40,549
				 |   | 
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 07:19 PM | #127 | |
| Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean 
					Posts: 18,988
				 |   Quote: 
 We have the statement of Carrier that Ehrman is INCOMPETENT and we have Ehrman's book. Let us NOT divert from the OP. | |
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 07:23 PM | #128 | ||
| Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia 
					Posts: 5,714
				 |   Quote: 
 "... not only of Jesus but of nearly anyone living in the first century. We simply don't have birth notices, trial records, death certificates or other standard kinds of records that one has today.”Ehrman uses the present tense: "We simply don't have, etc" I find it hard to believe that Ehrman is claiming that the Romans never kept such records at all, or as Carrier puts it: "our not having them means Romans never kept them". Maybe Ehrman is claiming that all such records have gone, but Ehrman does say just before "NEARLY anyone living in the first century". So I'm wondering about the context there. | ||
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 07:23 PM | #129 | 
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Iceland 
					Posts: 761
				 |   
			
			Well, for what it's worth, we all agree that Acharya is wrong!    | 
|   | 
|  04-21-2012, 07:31 PM | #130 | 
| Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa 
					Posts: 9,337
				 |   
			
			Rabbi Simeon ben Azzai (late first/early second century) claims that he found a scroll of genealogical record in Jerusalem, in which was written: A certain person was illegitimately born of a married woman (m. Yebam. 4:13; cf. b. Yebam. 49a).  This was understood to apply to Jesus.  This in no way proves that Jesus existed, only that the Jews thought he was a mamzer - perhaps owing to gnostic speculation about the fall of Sophia?
		 | 
|   | 
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread | 
| 
 |