Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 03-01-2011, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

I was astounded the other day to see where even a scholar of Ehrman's standing committed the "we have as much evidence for jesus as we do for Julius Caesar" absurdity.

Where was that Minimalist?

Quote:

What it is with religion that turns apparently intelligent people into lunatics?

Peer review? Hobby HJ horses? Good question.

mountainman · 03-01-2011, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtheistGamer

How do we know that Ceasar wrote his commentaries on the gallic wars?

Maybe we don't.

When somebody tells me I'll burn in hell if I doubt he wrote them, then maybe I'll worry about it. Or maybe not even then.

Since his gallic wars resulted in the death of a million gallic celts and the importation of another million as slaves into the glorious Roman Empire, the worry may prove to be trivial. Its a hellish history question though.

AtheistGamer · 03-01-2011, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

In classical times, it was a convention for the author to refer to himself in the third person. From Vernon Robbin's paper

Quote:

At least as early as Thucydides (ca. 460-400 B.C.) a standard had been set for narrative historiography that included third person narrative style. Thucydides carried this style through with remarkable candor, so that, beginning with book 4 of the History of the Peloponnesian War, he recounted his own activities in the army in third person narration.

If that's the case then I'm going to have to stop using the argument that the gospels couldn't have been written by their "authors" since they refer to the "authors" in the third person.

Toto · 03-01-2011, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtheistGamer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

In classical times, it was a convention for the author to refer to himself in the third person. From Vernon Robbin's paper

If that's the case then I'm going to have to stop using the argument that the gospels couldn't have been written by their "authors" since they refer to the "authors" in the third person.

That's not a very good argument. I think you can find better ones.

Start with the language. The gospels are written in Greek, but Jesus and his disciples would have spoken Aramaic.

aa5874 · 03-01-2011, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtheistGamer

If that's the case then I'm going to have to stop using the argument that the gospels couldn't have been written by their "authors" since they refer to the "authors" in the third person.

That's not a very good argument. I think you can find better ones.

Start with the language. The gospels are written in Greek, but Jesus and his disciples would have spoken Aramaic.

So Josephus did NOT write anything, then? Josephus spoke Aramic and writings attributed to him are in Greek?

Toto · 03-01-2011, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

...
So Josephus did NOT write anything, then? Josephus spoke Aramic and writings attributed to him are in Greek?

Josephus spoke Aramaic and we are told that he wrote his first book in Aramaic, which was translated into Koine Greek. He then wrote in Greek, with some help from Greek speaking editorial assistants.

avi · 03-02-2011, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

...we are told that he wrote his first book in Aramaic, ...

Is this idea derived from Eusebius?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

For many years, the works of Josephus were printed only in an imperfect Latin translation from the original Greek. It was only in 1544 that a version of the Greek text was made available, edited by the Dutch humanist Arnoldus Arlenius.

Roger has made a detailed inquiry into presumed patristic citations of Josephus.

Origen seems to figure rather prominently, among the authors included in his collection of vignettes. (Thanks, Roger, nice effort...)

avi

Doug Shaver · 03-02-2011, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Start with the language. The gospels are written in Greek, but Jesus and his disciples would have spoken Aramaic.

I'm not sure that's much of an argument. Any of them could have dictated to someone who knew Greek.

I've always been satisfied just to challenge defenders of the traditional authorship to make a case for it. As far as I'm concerned, I don't have to prove Mark didn't write the earliest gospel. Until someone produces good evidence that he did, its authorship is unknown, pure and simple. And if we don't know who wrote it, then we don't know how much of what's in it we're obliged to believe.

aa5874 · 03-02-2011, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

...
So Josephus did NOT write anything, then? Josephus spoke Aramic and writings attributed to him are in Greek?

Josephus spoke Aramaic and we are told that he wrote his first book in Aramaic, which was translated into Koine Greek. He then wrote in Greek, with some help from Greek speaking editorial assistants.

But, are we NOT told the same thing for gMatthew? After all it is claimed by the Church writers that gMatthew was first written for the Jews in the Jewish language.

Church 3.24.6

Quote:

...6. For Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss of his presence....

Minimalist · 03-02-2011, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Where was that Minimalist?

Might have been at Atheist Forums.com. I'll see if I can do a search and find it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.