Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 09-30-2013, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Says the guy who very carefully omits consideration of the obvious fact that the embankment provides a good terminus ad quem for the fragment. You're just being funny now.

You have NO evidence for your Presumptive story about the embankment.

You very well know that there is no actual historical record for the actual capture and final destruction of Dura and no actual historical record for when the embankment in question was put in place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

...Ultimately there is more evidence than Kraeling admits to. The siege dates itself by the coins found with the death soldiers in the countermining tunnel mentioned earlier in the thread with citation. Wake up, boyo.

The coins cannot show when Fragment 24 was buried. The coins show that people were most likely in Dura AFTER the coins were minted.

Juma · 09-30-2013, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

The fucking wall collapsed at an extremely specific dating. Please explain what issues you take with historical reality. What alternative hypotheses are you proposing? Let me guess, you don't have any but don't like being 'bullied' by the evidence. Don't be a zuzu. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Evidence? Alternative hypotesis? Why cant you never realize how little you really know? You want to be be sure, you want to beleive you know and that so much that you totally lost sense of reality.

Humans have a tendency to align the dots where there werent any lines to begin with.

mountainman · 09-30-2013, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Confirmation Bias
...

Denialism

Technically there's middle ground somewhere. Where?

mountainman · 09-30-2013, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

...

I know that later 4th century Coptic uses nomina sacra, and that a fair amount of Christian related manuscripts (all later than the 4th century) are also preserved in Syriac. But I don't know whether these Syriac manuscripts use Syriac nomina sacra, like the Coptic nomina sacra are in the Coptic manuscripts.

You know that Coptic is written in a variation of the Greek alphabet?

Yes of course I do. My question is whether the [later] Syriac sources preserved an equivalent Greek nomina sacra in their texts like the Coptic sources did. Does anyone know the answer to this question?

mountainman · 09-30-2013, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

The Syriac doesn't get you to a iota-eta nomen sacrum. If you have no significant way of explaining its existence, you have no explanatory power and your quibbling is useless.

Either Dura Fragment 24 is a (later) harmony of the four Greek gospels (with their nomina sacra) or the Greek gospels are a (later) four-fold expansion of something similar to a single complete manuscript, of which DF24 is a fragment.

With regard to the latter alternative, a Syriac original is not out of the question and the (later) addition of nomina sacra (to the Greek translation) is a separate question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Edit to be clear: there is no Syriac source for the combination iota-eta in the nomen sacrum. It requires a Greek name such as Ιησους. Can you find even one alternative??? In fact a search of the LXX for words starting with Ιη, gave only one word (232 times). You cannot explain ΙΗ through Syriac and the only example that appears in the LXX is Ιησους. No-one else has a name starting with the same two letters.

But the LXX is not the only source used by those who assembled the new testament. Another source is Josephus. In Josephus there may be such a name. One example from Josephus, that occurs to me off the top of my head, is the lineage of various figures called Izates (or Isates or Izaates and other variants) the King(s) of the Parthian client kingdom of Adiabene, who converted to Judaism.

mountainman · 09-30-2013, 10:36 PM

Thanks for this fascinating information about the "Flying Jesus".

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

the four gospels are a four-fold expansion of an earlier and single Syriac source narrative

Many have attempted to understand the gospels in these terms. They typically launch from the statement of Epiphanius that the Gospel of the Hebrews = the Diatessaron. Read Bill Petersen's book on the Diatessaron or the writings of Daniel Plooij. Against this position is Ulrich Schmid who does not believe the variants in the various harmonies go back to a lost source. Nevertheless Baarda does point to the flying Jesus tradition http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21102676847721 ...

Congratulations. We've all had to adapt our positions. My friend who is a doctor notes that 60% of the stuff he learned in med school has been disproved. Modifying a hypothesis is presupposed after any detailed experimentation. Anyone who hasn't changed their position in some way each year is engaging in theology rather than scientific research.

mountainman · 09-30-2013, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juma

Come on. Without C14 test there is no certain dating of this document.

Precisely.

spin · 09-30-2013, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

The Syriac doesn't get you to a iota-eta nomen sacrum. If you have no significant way of explaining its existence, you have no explanatory power and your quibbling is useless.

Either Dura Fragment 24 is a (later) harmony of the four Greek gospels (with their nomina sacra) or the Greek gospels are a (later) four-fold expansion of something similar to a single complete manuscript, of which DF24 is a fragment.

With regard to the latter alternative, a Syriac original is not out of the question and the (later) addition of nomina sacra (to the Greek translation) is a separate question.

You aren't responding to the issue. Try again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Edit to be clear: there is no Syriac source for the combination iota-eta in the nomen sacrum. It requires a Greek name such as Ιησους. Can you find even one alternative??? In fact a search of the LXX for words starting with Ιη, gave only one word (232 times). You cannot explain ΙΗ through Syriac and the only example that appears in the LXX is Ιησους. No-one else has a name starting with the same two letters.

But the LXX is not the only source used by those who assembled the new testament.

True and I did not present it as the only source. You simply miss the point. The LXX contains a wide range of names in Greek and only one presents itself as a candidate for a possible source for Ιη. Your job is to provide some other alternatives, not act like a headless chicken.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Another source is Josephus. In Josephus there may be such a name.

May be? Do your work and stop the vacuousness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

One example from Josephus, that occurs to me off the top of my head, is the lineage of various figures called Izates (or Isates or Izaates and other variants) the King(s) of the Parthian client kingdom of Adiabene, who converted to Judaism.

How the fuck can that provide the eta??? You don't know. But at least it does start with a iota. Well, not good enough, is it. The problem is the combination of iota-eta, which is actually quite rare as I hope to have already demonstrated.

spin · 09-30-2013, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juma

Come on. Without C14 test there is no certain dating of this document.

Precisely.

Ignorance is not a good basis to argue from.

spin · 09-30-2013, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Confirmation Bias
...

Denialism

Technically there's middle ground somewhere. Where?

We'll let you know when you arrive.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.