Steven Avery

Here you are simply contradicting Richard Carrier in the post right above your post.

Which is even stated directly in the Carrier article on the web.

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...quirinius.html
The Date of the Nativity in Luke (5th ed., 2006)

So apparently your repeated claim was simply untrue. Or, unlikely, Richard Carrier is making a completely unnecessary concession and falsely wrote that Beyer did site texts.

Now Richard raises what appears at face to be legitimate
questions about Italian and French manuscripts (and them
jumps to his own contusions) so that would be the next point of research. One does wonder if Richard Carrier attempted to
contact David Beyer on the textual matter before his own
jumps ?

Note: some of Carrier's assertions are very strange <edit>.

"Any mss. that Beyer examined were no doubt either from these inferior Latin mss.. or Greek translations from these Latin mss."

"Even allowing such an inconceivable error on the part of Josephus"

The first is circular to the max, a classic hand-waving. And whatever Carrier thinks is inconceivable is up in the air. Josephus is not responsible for future copyists errors, and few claim that his numbers are infallible to the point of inconceivable error.

Richard Carrier's writing, as in the LXX article, is riddled with these types of problems.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin Thanks for supporting my point, praxeus. We don't even know what language the individual text was written in, Latin or Greek. If Greek, is it a retranslation from Latin? So much for citing text.spin

Judge responded to this as well. In general, the presumption of a Greek text would be that it is not a reverse translation. Unless there is some substantive evidence offered. To raise the issue without offering any evidence that reverse translation is noted in Josephus manuscripts would be a classic smokescreen.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

spin

What would ever have made you think this little piece of fantasy? Why don't you have a look at the other examples of oath taking in Josephus and compare them? None of the language could make you think of a registration for taxation.

If you look at the Hebrew testament in the Codex Alexandrinus one finds numerous passages that have been doctored through returning to the Hebrew, ie the editors have retranslated the Hebrew. An editor of Josephus with knowledge of the Latin vicesimo secundo could translate it back into Greek.


spin

spin

Interesting, as I said to judge, I haven't read the Carrier article, so why should I care? Because you'd like to whip up some meaningful discussion? Hardly. You are merely hoping like judge to to be able to go away feeling a little less compromised over the conflict in the dating of Jesus's birth.

Still laboring to eke something out of Carrier. Why waste your efforts with tertiary literature when all you need do is cite information on Beyer's direct use of the original languages.

As usual, you simply don't have a clue.

As you keep parading the Carrier article for want of your own research, what exactly in it has offended your delicate sensibilities?


spin

judge

So we have aregistration without taxation.

You didn't answer my question though.

Here it is again...Who, do you imagine, would have been retranslating a Latin text back into ancient greek?

judge

Doesn't really matter to me.

judge

Yes I tend to agree. His approach is too dogmatic. He can't seem to countenance any thought he himself may be wrong.

When religious folk do this we should be wary IMHO but really when anybody does it.

Toto

<edited> Ok, I found the reference to Beyer, but not the actual quote above.

judge

There is mention of Beyer here. Go down to Was Philip made king in 2 B.C.?

Dont know if that is all there is.

Sauron

You're attempting to poison the well by making Richard Carrier out to be a close-minded dogmatist. Having corresponded with Richard I can tell you that your characterization of him is wrong.

Moreover, a cursory glance through his writing will show that he entertains the contrary arguments to his position - something he would not do, if he were as dogmatic as you're desperately trying to make him out to be. In fact, you can't even get through the first page of his essay, without seeing him demonstrate that he is willing to entertain the idea that he might be wrong:

Steven Avery

And I have only been following two issues, census/enrollment
and the Josephus date for Herod's death.

Errancywiki has stuff from the Richard Carrier section above.
It is in a discussion page, not the article itself.
http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Talk:Legends

Dunno about the secular web.

Shalom,
Steven Avery