Juliana

Ask a Latinist, 'Caius' means 'son of the earth', 'earthly man' and can very well be understood/translated as 'son of man'.
As to the biblia judaica, the so-called Old Testament, it seems you still haven't understood that the root of Christianity is Roman not Jewish. Jesus was a Roman. Would that be a problem if proven true?

Is the reason why you refuse to look at the evidence that you don't want it to be true? Since this is an infidels' forum I don't understand this unwillingness to look at it objectively. If this were a believers' forum I'd ask whether Jesus would be less holy if proven to be a Roman, but here?
What is your problem, you infidels?

Chris Weimer

First of all, it was most often written Gaius at this point in Roman history, even though it was still abbreviated C. This was due to the Older Roman (Etruscan) alphabet which didn't have G, but only C, K, and Q. During the Ciceronian era and little before, the Romans tended to drop the Q and only have C, thus solidifying the unvoiced version of C. But that created the need for the voiced version so they added G instead. So please, let's keep it consistent here. Gaius is preferred. And not quite. Gaius means "of the earth", just like Aurelius means "golden", but "son of earth" is quite a stretch. It could mean that, but it would only do so as an English idiom for describing one's descendents. It's actually the substantive form of the unattested gaius, -a, -um which isn't found, surprisingly enough, in Latin at all! For the same reason, Aurelius (or Valerius etc...) is the substantive for aurelius "golden" but to say that Marcus Aurelius is the Son of Gold is even farther of a stretch. Moreover, one would have to take leaps and bounds to go from "son of the earth" to "son of man" - the two being so unsimilar to make a connection would require concrete proof, not just some silly "anyone can see the connection." No, quite clearly, there is no connection. Not literal, not metaphorical. None.

Circular argument.

I don't evaluate evidence because I'm an infidel, I evaluate evidence objectively based on sound reasoning and logic, both of which you utterly lack. Dicisne latinam, Juliana, vel conerisne vos nugari? Well, you know what they say, Caveat Emptor.

Juliana

So you know some Latin, fine. Put some Greek in there too, if you can.

This is not a circular argument but the result of a long study.
So long as you refuse to evaluate it, you can't call it a "circular argument".
If you find errors, show them in your scholarly fashion.

I'm a little out of practise but I can read Latin. And no, I'm not trying to fool you. You don't have to buy anything, just go to Carotta's website and read essential parts of book there. For the rest you have to wait until next year.
In case you are interested and don't want to wait until then and want to read it in a nicely printed book, you can order one through Amazon, e.g. If, however, you are a poor guy who can't afford to buy it, send me a message with your address and I'll send you a copy for free.

Haec nova sit ratio vincendi ut misericordia et liberalitate nos muniamus.

Chris Weimer

Sure can do! What part of the NT do you want me to translate for you?

No, its quite circular. You say Jesus is Roman so you can't evaluate the Semitic background of the gospels in order to show that Jesus isn't Roman! You can't just exclaim he is Roman, you need to provide concrete evidence, of which the only thing you have to show so far is a tortured words which I completely destroyed. Next?

You'll really send it for free? I would accept, but I'm not so sure how fast you'll get a full critical analysis out of me - I have other projects simmering.

Nah, I prefer tearing up poor scholarship to shreds.

Valete bene,

Chris

Juliana

Once you've begun studying 'Jesus was Caesar' you'll forget your other projects, I bet. So send me a pm.

Vale

Juliana

Thomas II

It happens...It happens...

judge

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery I guess eh Spin?

Chris Weimer

I've been tearing up illogical arguments and poor scholarship before I even knew who spin was. I didn't start of in the BC&H forum, and soon your overwhelming ignorance might drive me off. You don't even bother to work with what I've given you, judge. I hate to say it, and it probably isn't appropriate, but I think your guise is wearing thin. Why, for example, did you take up the position of the Church of the East under no modifications at T-web? I suspect a hidden agenda here, and with Juliana also. At least she is giving me a book to work with, but you, pitiful judge, can't even make an argument. :down:

Juliana

She, please, would give you a book if she knew where to send it.
And of course all women have hidden agendas, cherchez la femme, however, if you are as clever as you think you are, it won't be a problem for you to find out.

Juliana

judge

Chris I'm referring to the way you are imitating his wording. now.

Try and see the lighter side and not take yourself too seriously.

Oh and stop this self pity angle please. My ignorance is going to drive you off? Pu-lease