Historical Jesus

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron

Re: Historical Jesus

#42241  Postby Tracer Tong » May 08, 2017 12:24 pm

proudfootz wrote:I'm afraid I will not be able to follow the discussion in Koine Greek.

Good luck, fellas!

I'll have to depend on the judgement of the translators.


Be aware that not all translators (as well as scholars in general) view this text as suspect.
Die Alten sind weder die Juden, noch die Christen, noch die Engländer der Poesie. Sie sind nicht ein willkürlich auserwähltes Kunstvolk Gottes; noch haben sie den alleinseligmachenden Schönheitsglauben; noch besitzen sie ein Dichtungsmonopol.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1605
Male

Country: Scotland
Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42242  Postby proudfootz » May 08, 2017 12:31 pm

Χαρούμενος τύχη σε όλους σας
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 11041

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42243  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 08, 2017 1:04 pm

Tracer Tong wrote:
proudfootz wrote:I'm afraid I will not be able to follow the discussion in Koine Greek.

Good luck, fellas!

I'll have to depend on the judgement of the translators.


Be aware that not all translators (as well as scholars in general) view this text as suspect.


Which other translators, for example? Do any of these other translators mention the fact that the translators cited above class the reference as an interpolation? Do any of the scholars who view the Christian reference in this text to be genuine, address the judgement of the translators cited?
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
 
Posts: 907

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42244  Postby Tracer Tong » May 08, 2017 1:54 pm

Leucius Charinus wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
proudfootz wrote:I'm afraid I will not be able to follow the discussion in Koine Greek.

Good luck, fellas!

I'll have to depend on the judgement of the translators.


Be aware that not all translators (as well as scholars in general) view this text as suspect.


Which other translators, for example? Do any of these other translators mention the fact that the translators cited above class the reference as an interpolation? Do any of the scholars who view the Christian reference in this text to be genuine, address the judgement of the translators cited?


In the Oxford (1989) translation of A.S.L Farquharson, with notes supplied by Richard Rutherford, the latter rejects calls (namely by P. A. Brunt) for deletion of the reference. In Oxford's replacement of this translation (2011), translated by Robin Hard and with notes by Christopher Gill, the latter recognises that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation, but does not himself endorse their position. As for Farquharson, in his text (Oxford, 1944), he doesn't delete the reference, either.

So, it's fair to say that there's no unanimity on this issue. But this is really beside the point: whatever these folks say, what matters is the facts. You suggest the text is an interpolation because it's ungrammatical, and therefore it's up to you to demonstrate that is the case.
Die Alten sind weder die Juden, noch die Christen, noch die Engländer der Poesie. Sie sind nicht ein willkürlich auserwähltes Kunstvolk Gottes; noch haben sie den alleinseligmachenden Schönheitsglauben; noch besitzen sie ein Dichtungsmonopol.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1605
Male

Country: Scotland
Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42245  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 09, 2017 11:43 am

Tracer Tong wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
proudfootz wrote:I'm afraid I will not be able to follow the discussion in Koine Greek.

Good luck, fellas!

I'll have to depend on the judgement of the translators.


Be aware that not all translators (as well as scholars in general) view this text as suspect.


Which other translators, for example? Do any of these other translators mention the fact that the translators cited above class the reference as an interpolation? Do any of the scholars who view the Christian reference in this text to be genuine, address the judgement of the translators cited?


In the Oxford (1989) translation of A.S.L Farquharson, with notes supplied by Richard Rutherford, the latter rejects calls (namely by P. A. Brunt) for deletion of the reference. In Oxford's replacement of this translation (2011), translated by Robin Hard and with notes by Christopher Gill, the latter recognises that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation, but does not himself endorse their position. As for Farquharson, in his text (Oxford, 1944), he doesn't delete the reference, either.

So, it's fair to say that there's no unanimity on this issue. But this is really beside the point: whatever these folks say, what matters is the facts. You suggest the text is an interpolation because it's ungrammatical, and therefore it's up to you to demonstrate that is the case.


Quite a number of professional translators suggest the text is an interpolation because it's ungrammatical. My money is on the judgement of these translators. As a result, IMHO, Marcus Aurelius does not represent a pagan witness to the historicity of the Christians. He is most likely completely unaware of what Eusebius refers to as --- "the Nation of Christians".


    p.139


    "Preparatio evangelica is one of the boldest attempts ever made to show
    continuity between pagan and Christian thought."

    [IRONY]

    "[Eusebius], the witness of the last persecution and the advisor and apologist
    of Constantine was in a vantage position to appreciate the autonomy and strength
    of the institution that had compelled the Roman state to surrender at the Milvian
    Bridge in 312. Though anxious to preserve the pagan cultural heritage in the new
    Christian order - indeed very anxious, as we shall soon see, to use the pagan tradition
    for his Ecclesiastical History - Eusebius knew that the Christians were a nation,
    and a victorious nation at that; and that their history could not be told except
    within the framework of the Church in which they lived. Furthermore, he was well
    aware that the Christian nation was what it was by virtue of its being both the
    oldest and the newest nation of the world."

    [/IRONY]

    The Classical Foundations of Modern Historiography
    Arnaldo Momigliano
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
 
Posts: 907

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42246  Postby Tracer Tong » May 09, 2017 11:58 am

Leucius Charinus wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:

Be aware that not all translators (as well as scholars in general) view this text as suspect.


Which other translators, for example? Do any of these other translators mention the fact that the translators cited above class the reference as an interpolation? Do any of the scholars who view the Christian reference in this text to be genuine, address the judgement of the translators cited?


In the Oxford (1989) translation of A.S.L Farquharson, with notes supplied by Richard Rutherford, the latter rejects calls (namely by P. A. Brunt) for deletion of the reference. In Oxford's replacement of this translation (2011), translated by Robin Hard and with notes by Christopher Gill, the latter recognises that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation, but does not himself endorse their position. As for Farquharson, in his text (Oxford, 1944), he doesn't delete the reference, either.

So, it's fair to say that there's no unanimity on this issue. But this is really beside the point: whatever these folks say, what matters is the facts. You suggest the text is an interpolation because it's ungrammatical, and therefore it's up to you to demonstrate that is the case.


Quite a number of professional translators suggest the text is an interpolation because it's ungrammatical. My money is on the judgement of these translators.


And quite a number do not. I'm still missing a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical. Is it fair to assume that you're unable to provide one?
Die Alten sind weder die Juden, noch die Christen, noch die Engländer der Poesie. Sie sind nicht ein willkürlich auserwähltes Kunstvolk Gottes; noch haben sie den alleinseligmachenden Schönheitsglauben; noch besitzen sie ein Dichtungsmonopol.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1605
Male

Country: Scotland
Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42247  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 10, 2017 10:53 am

You have already admitted - in your quotation - that its is openly recognised that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation. If you are indeed interested in a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical you know where to look.
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
 
Posts: 907

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42248  Postby Tracer Tong » May 10, 2017 3:19 pm

Leucius Charinus wrote:You have already admitted - in your quotation - that its is openly recognised that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation. If you are indeed interested in a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical you know where to look.


There's no answer to my question here. Is it fair to assume that you're unable to provide a demonstration that the text is ungrammatical?
Die Alten sind weder die Juden, noch die Christen, noch die Engländer der Poesie. Sie sind nicht ein willkürlich auserwähltes Kunstvolk Gottes; noch haben sie den alleinseligmachenden Schönheitsglauben; noch besitzen sie ein Dichtungsmonopol.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1605
Male

Country: Scotland
Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42249  Postby dejuror » May 10, 2017 10:29 pm

Who in this thread can demonstrate that the text is grammatical or not? We have no actual genuine manuscript of "Meditations" attributed to Marcus Aurelius dated to his time as Emperor.

What is very significant is that the earliest dated Codex [the Sinaiticus Codex c 325 CE] does not even contain the term Christian/Christians and no manuscript dated to the time of Marcus Aurelius [c 121-180 CE] have been found with the term Christian/ChrIstians

The author of Acts of the Apostles in the Sinaiticus Codex claimed the disciples were called ChrEstians and Saul/Paul almost persuaded Agrippa to become a ChrEstian [a believer in ChrEstus].



Amazingly, the author of 1 Peter in the Sinaiticus Codex also used the term ChrEstians [Not Christians].

http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?=Submit%20Query&book=51&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0

There is simply no actual documentary evidence to show that there were people called Christians in the time of Marcus Aurelius.
Last edited by dejuror on May 11, 2017 1:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
dejuror
 
Posts: 4755

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42250  Postby proudfootz » May 11, 2017 12:40 am

Leucius Charinus wrote:You have already admitted - in your quotation - that its is openly recognised that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation. If you are indeed interested in a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical you know where to look.


Even if some scholars suddenly showed up and started arguing on this thread about Koine Greek grammar, I doubt many here would be able to follow the discussion without learning Koine Greek for ourselves.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 11041

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42251  Postby Tracer Tong » May 11, 2017 1:51 am

proudfootz wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:You have already admitted - in your quotation - that its is openly recognised that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation. If you are indeed interested in a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical you know where to look.


Even if some scholars suddenly showed up and started arguing on this thread about Koine Greek grammar, I doubt many here would be able to follow the discussion without learning Koine Greek for ourselves.


But Leucius Charinus should be able to follow the discussion, since he must be proficient in Greek-how else would he know the text is ungrammatical? And dejuror should likewise be able to follow, since it turns out he's a palaeographer.
Die Alten sind weder die Juden, noch die Christen, noch die Engländer der Poesie. Sie sind nicht ein willkürlich auserwähltes Kunstvolk Gottes; noch haben sie den alleinseligmachenden Schönheitsglauben; noch besitzen sie ein Dichtungsmonopol.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1605
Male

Country: Scotland
Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42252  Postby dejuror » May 11, 2017 2:37 am

There is no actual contemporary evidence of any person named Jesus who was called the Christ or of any other person who was called the Christ in the time of Tiberius. If there was no Jesus Christ and no person called Christ then it would mean that there would be no followers or believers in Christ, in effect, no persons or cult called Christians.

But, now the mention of the term Christian/Christians is extremely suspect as an interpolation.

Examine writings attributed to supposed 1st-2nd century writers.

Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3 attributed to Josephus mentions Christians once but it is a forgery.
Tacitus Annals attributed to Tacitus mentions Christians once but it is a forgery.

It is admitted by the supposed Tertullian in the mid-3rd century that people in the Roman Empire did not even know the name "Christian"

Apology attributed to Tertullian
But Christian, so far as the meaning of the word is concerned, is derived from anointing.

Yes, and even when it is wrongly pronounced by you “Chrestianus” (for you do not even know accurately the name you hate)......


The term Christian/Christians was not known or not used by people in the Roman Empire up to the mid-3rd century based on Apology attributed to Tertullian.

...it is wrongly pronounced by you “Chrestianus”
" you do not even know accurately the name you hate"......
dejuror
 
Posts: 4755

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42253  Postby tanya » May 11, 2017 1:51 pm

Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor from 161-180CE, wrote his "Meditations", in Greek, not Latin.

In Greek, the distinction between χρίω (anoint), and χρη (good) is significant. In English, we look at the vowels, and sigh, "why"? What's the fuss about?

We tend to discount the significance of these two distinctly different vowels, because, in my opinion, we native English speakers have such mediocre linguistic hygiene. We English speakers slur vowels, routinely; we are as a group, an uneducated lot.

Simple example: The apostle, Thomas. How is his name pronounced in English? TAHMIS, instead of TOEMAHS. Our own confusion about pronunciation underlies this controversy about the original Greek text. Marcus Aurelius had no such problem with understanding the distinction between "anoint" versus "good". He may well have read Exodus 30:22-38 in Koine Greek:

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/apostolic/exodus/30.htm

Having fought the Parthians for decades, in the Eastern empire, Aurelius would likely have known of the Zoroastrian tradition of anointing with Rose petals. Whether with olive oil or other precious ointments, the process of anointment represents public acknowledgement of a great man.

Juxtaposed to this famous individual, who receives widespread acclaim for his accomplishements, with a public ceremony: anointment, χρίω, the "chrestian" tradition focuses on an unheralded "nobody", who is performing good deeds in obscurity, without public approval, in the tradition of Asclepius', Apollonius', Hippocrates' and Galen's therapeutae. This distinction between χρίω and χρη, would have been very clear to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

The difference in meaning is further clarified by consulting Lidell and Scott's lexicon, which provides several examples of the use of χρη. The lexicon clarifies that in addition to "good", χρη also implies, based on context, "duty", i.e. one's proper code of conduct. One should do good deeds, even if public acknowledgement of the effort is absent--that is, without reward--χρη.

So, did Marcus Aurelius, a prominent politician, soldier, and emperor, i.e. one who himself had experienced anointment-- χρίω, encounter small groups of ordinary citizens who believed in various supernatural entities? Perhaps. Were the accomplishments of such groups, possessed of such notoriety that he felt compelled to acknowledge them, in his memoirs? Maybe? Were Emperor Aurelius' writings preserved in Greek, exactly as he had written them, for 1500 years? Maybe not.

What interests me, in this debate, is to understand why, someone on this forum imagines that Marcus Aurelius had taken the time and trouble to document an encounter he may have had, with a small group of Roman citizens claiming to believe that a Jew from Roman Palestine had risen from the dead. We know that Commodus, son of Aurelius, and successor to him as Emperor, amused himself by re-enactment of Mithraic practices with a homicidal twist. Perhaps Marcus Aurelius had an inclination towards Mithraic practices? Did he visit the Mithraic temple in Dura Europos?
tanya
 
Posts: 285

France (fr)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42254  Postby Arjan Dirkse » May 12, 2017 1:40 am

tanya wrote:We know that Commodus, son of Aurelius, and successor to him as Emperor, amused himself by re-enactment of Mithraic practices with a homicidal twist. Perhaps Marcus Aurelius had an inclination towards Mithraic practices? Did he visit the Mithraic temple in Dura Europos?


I think there were Mithraic temples in the city of Rome itself. That cult was spread throughout the empire.
Arjan Dirkse
 
Posts: 1856
Male

Netherlands (nl)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42255  Postby dejuror » May 12, 2017 3:13 am

tanya wrote:Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor from 161-180CE, wrote his "Meditations", in Greek, not Latin......


If copies of Meditations are found in Greek that does not mean the original was in Greek or even written by Marcus Aurelius. It is known that many many writings were forged, manipulated and falsely attributed to persons who never ever existed.

It must not be forgotten that the writings even in the very NT of the Church are forgeries, manipulated or falsely attributed to fiction characters.

Why would Marcus Aurelius write about supposed Christians when the NT writers did not know of such a term up to the 4th century?

NT manuscripts dated to the 4th century are found in Greek with the term "ChrEstianos".

The Codex Vaticanus contains the term ChrEIstianos.

An 11th century copy of Annals attributed to Tacitus is found with the term "ChrEstianos".

Now examine "The Life of Claudius" attributed to Suetonius.

He [Claudius] banished from Rome all the Jews, who were continually making disturbances at the instigation of one Chrestus...


Followers of ChrEstus would be called ChrEstianos.
dejuror
 
Posts: 4755

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42256  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 12, 2017 11:48 am

Tracer Tong wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:You have already admitted - in your quotation - that its is openly recognised that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation. If you are indeed interested in a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical you know where to look.


Even if some scholars suddenly showed up and started arguing on this thread about Koine Greek grammar, I doubt many here would be able to follow the discussion without learning Koine Greek for ourselves.


But Leucius Charinus should be able to follow the discussion, since he must be proficient in Greek-how else would he know the text is ungrammatical?


Who needs to be proficient in Greek to understand the reasons - provided in English - by which a series of Greek to English translators class the Christian reference in Marcus Aurelius' "Meditations" as an interpolation?
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
 
Posts: 907

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42257  Postby proudfootz » May 12, 2017 1:00 pm

Leucius Charinus wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:You have already admitted - in your quotation - that its is openly recognised that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation. If you are indeed interested in a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical you know where to look.


Even if some scholars suddenly showed up and started arguing on this thread about Koine Greek grammar, I doubt many here would be able to follow the discussion without learning Koine Greek for ourselves.


But Leucius Charinus should be able to follow the discussion, since he must be proficient in Greek-how else would he know the text is ungrammatical?


Who needs to be proficient in Greek to understand the reasons - provided in English - by which a series of Greek to English translators class the Christian reference in Marcus Aurelius' "Meditations" as an interpolation?


Yes, I would like to see a paper or two (in English) on the reasoning behind the conclusions of those scholars who find the phrase to be an interpolation.

While it is interesting to know that the phrase is controversial, it would be of interest to me to have the argument laid out in detail. I've had no luck finding anything specific on this issue.

By any chance have you any links to such papers?
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 11041

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42258  Postby Tracer Tong » May 12, 2017 1:50 pm

Leucius Charinus wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:You have already admitted - in your quotation - that its is openly recognised that "some scholars" think it is an interpolation. If you are indeed interested in a demonstration of how the text is ungrammatical you know where to look.


Even if some scholars suddenly showed up and started arguing on this thread about Koine Greek grammar, I doubt many here would be able to follow the discussion without learning Koine Greek for ourselves.


But Leucius Charinus should be able to follow the discussion, since he must be proficient in Greek-how else would he know the text is ungrammatical?


Who needs to be proficient in Greek to understand the reasons - provided in English - by which a series of Greek to English translators class the Christian reference in Marcus Aurelius' "Meditations" as an interpolation?


I'm not suggesting you don't understand the reasons certain scholars (as we've seen, not all) think the text is an interpolation, of course. But you claimed the text is ungrammatical. Again (third time of asking!), is it fair to say you don't have the ability to demonstrate that is the case?
Die Alten sind weder die Juden, noch die Christen, noch die Engländer der Poesie. Sie sind nicht ein willkürlich auserwähltes Kunstvolk Gottes; noch haben sie den alleinseligmachenden Schönheitsglauben; noch besitzen sie ein Dichtungsmonopol.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1605
Male

Country: Scotland
Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42259  Postby proudfootz » May 12, 2017 3:06 pm

To be fair, I haven't seen any argument that the passage is original to Marcus.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 11041

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#42260  Postby Tracer Tong » May 12, 2017 5:25 pm

proudfootz wrote:To be fair, I haven't seen any argument that the passage is original to Marcus.


The question is whether there's any good reason to suspect its genuineness in the first place. As for that, there's a 1979 essay (which I alluded to earlier) by Peter Brunt which, among other things, allegedly argues that the reference is spurious. When I go to the library on Monday (or tomorrow, perhaps), I'll have a look at it (it's not accessible online, as far as I know), as well as check the Teubner text, to see if it's deleted there, and Farquharson's commentary.
Die Alten sind weder die Juden, noch die Christen, noch die Engländer der Poesie. Sie sind nicht ein willkürlich auserwähltes Kunstvolk Gottes; noch haben sie den alleinseligmachenden Schönheitsglauben; noch besitzen sie ein Dichtungsmonopol.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1605
Male

Country: Scotland
Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 8 guests