FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page The Flavian Hypothesis Merged with posts from Where are the Records?
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 9 of 19 « First 78 9 1011 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-02-2005, 03:34 PM   #81
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Santa Monica CA
Posts: 132
Default
Hi Riogan:

Only a portion of the one sigma range would be within the first century.

The equation: S2 total = s2precision + s2reproducibility + s2other - is generally used, that is used most often, to add the known and quantifiable aspects of uncertainty in such dating efforts so as to be able to determine the necessary ranges of the sigmas needed to provide their defined unit of probability. If you know of a more common method I would appreciate it if you would present it.

I am in agreement with your other comments, but would point out that the point of the article was to critique the methodology of those who claimed that a C14 pre first century median date for Habbukuk precluded - that is literally rendered impossible - it having been written in the first century. An absurd position.

In this context, the article was simply showing that - among their other oversights and misunderstandings - the group that conducted the tests and released the tests' "results" did not take into account C14 sampling variations.

Joe
John Deere is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 03:50 PM   #82
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Santa Monica CA
Posts: 132
Default
Spin:

As I suspected, you have not read Carrota's work as this is not his position. This is, however, if nothing else, consistant in that you have already admitted that you haven't read my work either. You are something of a marvel that you were able to come to such strong opinions regarding my C14 article without, evidentally, having read it and now are able to determine that Carrota and I have a "basically shared hypothesis", without having read either of our works.

I don't know what advice or feedback I can give to you except that if you wish to continue to play the fool, play on.

Joe
John Deere is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 04:04 PM   #83
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default
Joe - what do you mean it's not Carotta's position? I have the book, and he makes it very clear that Jesus was modeled after Caesar - if not directly so.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 04:09 PM   #84
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 154
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
The Roman origins of christianity
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Deere
Spin:
As I suspected, you have not read Carrota's work as this is not his position.
[...]
Just for the record:
The Dutch edition of JWC appeared in November 2002 under the title:
Was Jesus Caesar? On the Roman Origins of Christianity

In July 2003 Mr. Atwill published:
The Roman Origins of Christianity

For the English edition published in January 2005 Mr. Carotta [sic!] changed the title to:
Jesus was Caesar. On the Julian Origin of Christianity
Juliana is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 04:19 PM   #85
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 154
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Deere
[...]
As far as Carrota's work goes, it is simply not related to mine in any way and I do not understand how he draws the conclusions that he does.

Joe
What a pity.
Juliana is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 04:21 PM   #86
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: France
Posts: 1,831
Cool
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Deere
Hi everyone,

It is interesting to see the various impressions my book brings out. I would like to add the following comments.

First, the Gospels make the case that the generation of Jews that rebelled from Roman rule were wicked and that the coming destruction of the Galilean villages, the encircling of Jerusalem with a wall and the raising of the temple were ordained by God. What other group than the Flavians held this position?

Second, the typolgy that I show exists between Jesus and Titus was simply a continuation of the literary technique which established that the life of the first savior of Israel - Moses - 'foresaw' the second savior of Israel - Jesus. The obvious 'divine linkage' between Jesus and Moses was established by parallel names, locations and, most importantly, by a vast parallel sequence of related events. The 'divine linkage' that demonstrates that the life of the second savior of Israel - Jesus - 'foresaw' the final savior of Israel - Titus - simply continues this technique and, once understood, is no less clear.

Finally, discovering a intertextual relationship between purportedly Hebraic literature like the Gospels and Wars of the Jews should not be a surprise to anyone. Believing that 'God's plan' was revealed by typolgical linkage was common among Jews during this era. For example, the Habbakuk Pesher was written by someone looking for the same type of connection between scripture and history that I claim exists between the Gospels and Wars of the Jews. In fact, the Gospels were created as a spoof of the messianic Jews' typological searching, which evidentally struck the Flavian intellectual circle as barbaric.

In my opinion, the clarity of the parallels I point out in Caesar's Messiah is so vivid that few readers will doubt my conclusions. So my question to all bloggers this: Have you read the book?

I would very much like to see critical analysis from those who have read the book, but it is difficult to know how to respond to criticism from those that haven't.

Joe Atwill
Read my book, read my book... Buy my book... Are advertisments allowed here

I will certainly not after reading this ad, because :
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Deere
First, the Gospels make the case that the generation of Jews that rebelled from Roman rule were wicked and that the coming destruction of the Galilean villages, the encircling of Jerusalem with a wall and the raising of the temple were ordained by God.
This is a complete erroneous, ludicrous "first" and all the rest being based on this wrong premise will be bs.

The Jews who are rebelling are the good Jews.
The bad ones are the pro-Roman ones.
Johann_Kaspar is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 04:47 PM   #87
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Deere
As I suspected,
Are you having difficulty suspecting your way out of a wet paper bag, there John Deere?

I do try to avoid works that claim to provide miraculous solutions of the type X is responsible for Y, when we don't have enough information about Y.

I merely asked a simple question regarding a fundamentally shared hypothesis, ie that christianity is a Roman product. You through your usual obfuscation circumvented the question. Why don't you, as you are responsible for one version, explain why your flavour is better than the Carotta version?


spin
spin is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 04:57 PM   #88
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Deere
Hi Riogan:
Why does John Deere write this spelling every time he responds to rlogan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Deere
I am in agreement with your other comments, but would point out that the point of the article was to critique the methodology of those who claimed that a C14 pre first century median date for Habbukuk precluded - that is literally rendered impossible - it having been written in the first century.
When the C14 data provided by the testing lab is nice and clear with a certain claim of accuracy; you either run with it or you retest.

As I have pointed out in the past, Pesher Habakkuk tests to wholly in the 1st c. BCE. This date is not acceptible to John Deere, so he is trying everything he can to dispute it.


spin
spin is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 05:00 PM   #89
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Santa Monica CA
Posts: 132
Default
Chris:

Simply put, Carotta does not believe that Jesus was 'modeled' on Julius Caesar per se, but rather that mistranslated literature from Julius Caesar's cult was the basis for much of the Gospels. Carotta's work is not easy to paraphrase but in general he sees a complex historical process with many different elements ultimately leading to Christianity. I doubt if Franseco - who I correspond with - would agree with the idea that Christianity can be seen as solely 'originating' in Rome. However, if you have read Caesar's Messiah you will know that this is a different position to mine, which is that the Flavians were completely responsible for the Gospels and Christianity.



Joe
John Deere is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 05:04 PM   #90
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: France
Posts: 1,831
Cool
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregor
What's with all the folks flogging Atwill's book (or apologists for it) on this forum. Methinks I smell a literary agent somewhere.
Quite right. Several newbies. Soon... gone with the wind... :rolling:
Johann_Kaspar is offline  
 
Page 9 of 19 « First 78 9 1011 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:53 AM.

Top

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