Is there a cure for homophobia? Introducing Lovelace......

[eider]

[COLOR=black]In post in Syria for the first few years of Pilate’s term of office. There was a legate but he was in Rome for that period.

Question.
Were Rome's forces still garrisoned in Syria during that time?

[eider]

That practise was not unknown. I must also correct you. Galilee was a client kingdom to Rome with a Hellenised king.. The province of Judaea was a Roman province. It may not have been "crawling" with Romans but there would have been various individuals with non Jewish antecedent, merchants, tax collectors, administrators, etc.

Not in 4-3 BC. Legate Varus had to send forces to Zippori.

I did mention that some Roman Tax officials would be supervising to publicans.

That in the canonical gospels the Romans rarely make an appearance [at least until the Passion narratives] has been likened to presenting an account of Vichy France without mentioning the Nazis.

Apart from senior tax officials etc, the only Romans in Galilee were holidaymakers.

And there were no Roman forces just East of Jordan. Antipas had to police that area, hence his forces brought in the Baptist.

[CivilDiscourse]

Not at all. I thought about mentioning that Analogy Fallacies are common in all manner of ways.

But Professor Corvino answered yours sweetly.

That was like you walking around with a billboard reading 'Please laugh at me!'

You might want to actually show where he refuted anything I said.

As he names the fallacy you are using, where someone makes an analogy, and your response is "Oh, so you are comparing X to Y? Outrageous"

[rogue06]

And yet more nonsense that once again attempts to draw direct comparisons between the 20th and 21st centuries with the ancient and the early medieval world.

I'm going to write this real slow in hopes that you can follow along.

This has nothing to do with 20th and 21st century and everything to do with the ancient and early medieval world. Counter-intelligence, strike teams and the like are nothing new under the sun. As I noted some of the techniques and tactics employed then were later used as models to copy by modern intelligence agencies and elite military forces. Both the Romans and especially the Byzantines were past masters at this sort of stuff.

That this is so far over your head is evidenced by your insistence that I should read Josephus and Philo, who offer little to nothing about such operations -- which really should come as absolutely no surprise.




As a total aside, most folks, thanks I think to Hollyweird, think that our special forces and elite military units got their inspiration from ninjas. No. Most would be surprised to learn who were their inspirations and major influences for various tactics and the like. It was Native Americans (especially those in the SW like the Apache), pirates (masters at surreptitiously boarding ships and sneaking ashore), and Vikings.

[Mountain Man]

Pilate was only trying to placate a very large crowd who loved Jesus dearly........ so he had to think up a reason for pardoning him and saving as much face as he could.

Um... the crowd clearly did not love Jesus dearly if they were demanding he be executed. You might want to crack open a Bible sometime and refresh your memory.

[tabibito]

I have been no more "rude" to you than you have about me. You should remember the old adage.. If you cannot take it do not hand it out.

But ... But ... you are the one who got upset when you were insulted. We now have your admission that you consider insults less than acceptable (when other people use them).

We therefore cannot verify your allegation and so it can be dismissed.

By you, it would be dismissed anyway.

For anyone who wants to follow up, the article below doesn't mention the final conflicts which saw monks subordinated to ecclesial authority, but it does give details about the opening stages. With the benefit of hindsight, the outcomes are known.

ECCLESIASTICS AND ASCETICS - De Gruyter

https://www.degruyter.com › doi › hug-2011-090103 › pdf

by JL Hevelone-Harper · 2011 — Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies, Vol. 9.1, 37-55. © 2006 [2009] by Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute and Gorgias Press. ECCLESIASTICS AND ASCETICS.

[tabibito]

[QUOTE=eider;n1280865]

You might impress me more if you show that you can transliterate-translate Early first century Eastern Aramaic with Galilean accent and dialect. Now that would be something! It would be very valuable!

It surely would, regardless of who might have done it.

As you have shown yourself, early copies of G-Mark did not include terms for Jesus such as 'Son of God'. An important part of studying the Gospels is to develop a nose for Christian addition and edition. Using such a practice does shorten the accounts ....

I did what?

But I do recognise that many passages which don't much help Christian apology have been kept in, even if adjusted. Early Christians must have been scared to mess too much with what had already been written, maybe for fear of punishments from on high? That's a thread for sometime in the future, I think.

The trend is to manufacture excuses to wrest or write off any inconvenient text - but that tendency isn't the sole province of either Christian or Atheist. Early writers, from what I can see, chose the former course. If a word or phrase was inconvenient - redefine it and the problem goes away.

Why would you translate Barabba in to 'Father's son' when it's logical to show the 'Bar' first? Strange.

I'll assume that your "Barabba" is due to no more than a typo. In a sentence, I probably would have used "son of the father." However,for an English speaking reader the usual pattern is to name the association first, and then the object: that is "He is John's son," not "He is the son of John."

Your real question should have addressed why I related the interpretation of a Hebrew/Aramaic word to Greek and Japanese rules of grammar. (It would have been embarrassing for someone else to have noticed first.) Then I would have had to explain that Lion's son (or son of a lion) is among a small number of possible interpretations available for the term.

I still haven't been able to locate an actual copy of Origen's text - but comment on the issue declares that Origen said he had a number of manuscripts that include "Barabbas," and that he found them deficient.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I'm going to write this real slow in hopes that you can follow along.

This has nothing to do with 20th and 21st century and everything to do with the ancient and early medieval world. Counter-intelligence, strike teams and the like are nothing new under the sun. As I noted some of the techniques and tactics employed then were later used as models to copy by modern intelligence agencies and elite military forces. Both the Romans and especially the Byzantines were past masters at this sort of stuff.

That this is so far over your head is evidenced by your insistence that I should read Josephus and Philo, who offer little to nothing about such operations -- which really should come as absolutely no surprise.




As a total aside, most folks, thanks I think to Hollyweird, think that our special forces and elite military units got their inspiration from ninjas. No. Most would be surprised to learn who were their inspirations and major influences for various tactics and the like. It was Native Americans (especially those in the SW like the Apache), pirates (masters at surreptitiously boarding ships and sneaking ashore), and Vikings.

I have never suggested that you read Philo or Josephus in respect of "counter-intelligence, strike teams and the like". That is your complete misunderstanding of what I wrote.

My advice was that you inform yourself about the history of this region from the mid first century BCE until the end of the first century CE by reading accredited academic secondary sources as well as those two primary sources that cover the history [Josephus] and the politco-religious and social situation prevailing in Judaea in the first century [Josephus and Philo]; as from what you repeatedly write it is self evident that you know absolutely nothing about this region at those points in history and nor do you seem to know anything about how Rome governed its provinces in the early principate.

Over the course of our exchanges on various topics I have also suggested secondary sources to you. However, you seem loath to inform yourself and simply persist in writing your fanciful nonsense.

I remind you again that there are reputable online sites to which you can refer, there are also papers and books freely available [albeit not always entire texts] and the USA has [according to OneBadPig] a free inter-library loan scheme which will acquire books from other libraries and deliver them to your nearest library for you to collect and then read. There may even be online "borrowing" available.

I therefore once again recommend that you avail yourself of all these facilities and opportunities.

[rogue06]

[QUOTE=tabibito;n1280984]

It surely would, regardless of who might have done it.



I did what?



The trend is to manufacture excuses to wrest or write off any inconvenient text - but that tendency isn't the sole province of either Christian or Atheist. Early writers, from what I can see, chose the former course. If a word or phrase was inconvenient - redefine it and the problem goes away.



In a sentence, I probably would have. Your real question should have addressed why I related the interpretation of a Hebrew/Aramaic word to Greek and Japanese rules of grammar. I'll assume that your "Barabba" is due to no more than a typo. Then I would have had to explain that Lion's son (or son of a lion) is among a small number of possible interpretations available for the term.

I still haven't been able to locate an actual copy of Origen's text - but comment on the issue declares that Origen said he had a number of manuscripts that include "Barabbas," and that he found them deficient.

Origen was a prolific writer, authoring several thousand works FWIU, although most are now lost. All I've been able to find so far on his comments concerning Barabbas is fragmentary making me wonder if that is all that remains.

Metzger's A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament has a few interesting things to say about it (page 56)

[rogue06]

I have never suggested that you read Philo or Josephus in respect of "counter-intelligence, strike teams and the like". That is your complete misunderstanding of what I wrote.

My advice was that you inform yourself about the history of this region from the mid first century BCE until the end of the first century CE by reading accredited academic secondary sources as well as those two primary sources that cover the history [Josephus] and the politco-religious and social situation prevailing in Judaea in the first century [Josephus and Philo]; as from what you repeatedly write it is self evident that you know absolutely nothing about this region at those points in history and nor do you seem to know anything about how Rome governed its provinces in the early principate.

Over the course of our exchanges on various topics I have also suggested secondary sources to you. However, you seem loath to inform yourself and simply persist in writing your fanciful nonsense.

I remind you again that there are reputable online sites to which you can refer, there are also papers and books freely available [albeit not always entire texts] and the USA has [according to OneBadPig] a free inter-library loan scheme which will acquire books from other libraries and deliver them to your nearest library for you to collect and then read. There may even be online "borrowing" available.

I therefore once again recommend that you avail yourself of all these facilities and opportunities.

I've been waiting over a month now for a book from a library at the other end of the county. Our inter-library system sucks.

The point that you keep missing, or evading, is that nothing that I said was "fanciful nonsense" and it might behoove you to do a bit of research into espionage, counter-intelligence and the like from the era. It would likely disabuse you of several of your silly notions.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I've been waiting over a month now for a book from a library at the other end of the county. Our inter-library system sucks.

The point that you keep missing, or evading, is that nothing that I said was "fanciful nonsense" and it might behoove you to do a bit of research into espionage, counter-intelligence and the like from the era. It would likely disabuse you of several of your silly notions.

The point I am making is that you need inform yourself. I am not hand-holding you. And I have already mentioned an academic work dealing with Rome's intelligence services. A volume that, given your vaunted knowledge of this topic, you have never referenced nor appeared to recognise..

[rogue06]

The point I am making is that you need inform yourself. I am not hand-holding you. And I have already mentioned an academic work dealing with Rome's intelligence services. A volume that, given your vaunted knowledge of this topic, you have never referenced nor appeared to recognise..

Where? If you did I missed it in all the superfluous B.S.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Where? If you did I missed it in all the superfluous B.S.

Go back and read through my replies slowly and carefully.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

But ... But ... you are the one who got upset when you were insulted.

That I "note" the employment of pejoratives does not indicate I am upset by them.

[CivilDiscourse]

That I "note" the employment of pejoratives does not indicate I am upset by them.

She gets most upset when you call her out for being a rape apologist, or when someone sees signs of autism from her.