Any other English translations of Josephus

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Mental flatliner
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by Mental flatliner » Thu May 15, 2014 6:22 am

spin wrote:
Just more of the same blurt. A composite text has survived based on the earliest surviving manuscripts. A good translation of that text is what is necessary to make the most of that text. None of your claptrap will change that.
Ooops...

If the original text isn't extant, and our oldest copies are from centuries later, how can you make this statement? You don't know if you have a good translation if you never compared to the original.

I know you want really bad to be right, but you should think these things through. Offering other sources is always a valid choice. You don't have a rational reason to be offended.

Andrew
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 7:14 pm

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by Andrew » Thu May 15, 2014 8:01 am

The original texts of the gospels are not extant, yet you still think they're reliable. Just because we haven't found the original manuscript doesn't mean it isn't reliable. We don't have the original manuscripts for the entire Bible, and many of the texts we have are from centuries after the original text was written.

Mental flatliner
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by Mental flatliner » Thu May 15, 2014 10:20 am

Andrew wrote:The original texts of the gospels are not extant, yet you still think they're reliable. Just because we haven't found the original manuscript doesn't mean it isn't reliable. We don't have the original manuscripts for the entire Bible, and many of the texts we have are from centuries after the original text was written.
You misunderstand my comment.

I corrected you because when you find blanks in historical sources, you don't have the authority to fill them in with whatever you want. You're stuck with what you have.

You also misunderstood me.

I consider the gospels reliable because they corroborate each other, because they're corroborated by outside sources, and because to date, nothing has been found to legitimately contradict them. This is a higher degree of reliability than we have for most other historical events until modern times when written sources were abundant. Any rational person (absent bias) would be forced to conclude that everything in the gospels indeed happened simply because it's an abdication of common sense to do otherwise.

User avatar
spin
Posts: 1865
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by spin » Thu May 15, 2014 3:09 pm

Mental flatliner wrote:
spin wrote:
Just more of the same blurt. A composite text has survived based on the earliest surviving manuscripts. A good translation of that text is what is necessary to make the most of that text. None of your claptrap will change that.
Ooops...
Yes, say it again. It's one of the more cogent and reflective things you can say for yourself. If you had said it at the beginning you would ave saved yourself from exposing your nonsense. You can't get it through your shell-shocked head that when dealing with a foreign language text you can't read the first thing you need is a good translation. It's fundamental. And Whiston is now not up to scratch. All your dunderheadedness about other materials will not compensate for a poor translation. They also need translation, good translation. So first and foremost you have to go for quality of sources. Then you can make whatever comparisons you like to get more leverage on the significance of the text.
Mental flatliner wrote:If the original text isn't extant, and our oldest copies are from centuries later, how can you make this statement? You don't know if you have a good translation if you never compared to the original.

I know you want really bad to be right, but you should think these things through.
It's sad that you don't appreciate self-irony.
Mental flatliner wrote:Offering other sources is always a valid choice. You don't have a rational reason to be offended.
It's not an issue of choice. Thé topic was translation. You've lost the plot and have been jabbering on senselessly. Feel free to respond. I'll wash my hands of this persistent self-serving time wasting of yours.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes

Mental flatliner
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by Mental flatliner » Sat May 17, 2014 8:51 am

spin wrote:
Mental flatliner wrote:
spin wrote:
Just more of the same blurt. A composite text has survived based on the earliest surviving manuscripts. A good translation of that text is what is necessary to make the most of that text. None of your claptrap will change that.
Ooops...
Yes, say it again. It's one of the more cogent and reflective things you can say for yourself. If you had said it at the beginning you would ave saved yourself from exposing your nonsense. You can't get it through your shell-shocked head that when dealing with a foreign language text you can't read the first thing you need is a good translation. It's fundamental. And Whiston is now not up to scratch. All your dunderheadedness about other materials will not compensate for a poor translation. They also need translation, good translation. So first and foremost you have to go for quality of sources. Then you can make whatever comparisons you like to get more leverage on the significance of the text.
Mental flatliner wrote:If the original text isn't extant, and our oldest copies are from centuries later, how can you make this statement? You don't know if you have a good translation if you never compared to the original.

I know you want really bad to be right, but you should think these things through.
It's sad that you don't appreciate self-irony.
Mental flatliner wrote:Offering other sources is always a valid choice. You don't have a rational reason to be offended.
It's not an issue of choice. Thé topic was translation. You've lost the plot and have been jabbering on senselessly. Feel free to respond. I'll wash my hands of this persistent self-serving time wasting of yours.
This is a purely defensive response to a point of logic that you failed to address.

I was just talking to my wife about this. "Truth" has a mind and power of its own and asserts itself without our help. Human beings, when confronted with the truth, never respond with apathy. They either embrase it as a life-giving power, or they become defensive as if the power of the fact itself is personally threatening.

In this case, my comment can't have been personally threatening to you, it's just a fact that we have no original sources to test. But you responded defensively and so I must assume that you feel somehow threatened. This must be why you're powerless to respond intellectually--you have nothing to respond with.

User avatar
spin
Posts: 1865
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by spin » Sat May 17, 2014 9:37 am

Mental flatliner wrote:
spin wrote:
Just more of the same blurt. A composite text has survived based on the earliest surviving manuscripts. A good translation of that text is what is necessary to make the most of that text. None of your claptrap will change that.
Mental flatliner wrote:Ooops...
spin wrote:Yes, say it again. It's one of the more cogent and reflective things you can say for yourself. If you had said it at the beginning you would ave saved yourself from exposing your nonsense. You can't get it through your shell-shocked head that when dealing with a foreign language text you can't read the first thing you need is a good translation. It's fundamental. And Whiston is now not up to scratch. All your dunderheadedness about other materials will not compensate for a poor translation. They also need translation, good translation. So first and foremost you have to go for quality of sources. Then you can make whatever comparisons you like to get more leverage on the significance of the text.
Mental flatliner wrote:If the original text isn't extant, and our oldest copies are from centuries later, how can you make this statement? You don't know if you have a good translation if you never compared to the original.

I know you want really bad to be right, but you should think these things through.
It's sad that you don't appreciate self-irony.
Mental flatliner wrote:Offering other sources is always a valid choice. You don't have a rational reason to be offended.
It's not an issue of choice. Thé topic was translation. You've lost the plot and have been jabbering on senselessly. Feel free to respond. I'll wash my hands of this persistent self-serving time wasting of yours.
This is a purely defensive response to a point of logic that you failed to address.
You have no sense of irony.
Mental flatliner wrote:I was just talking to my wife about this. "Truth" has a mind and power of its own and asserts itself without our help. Human beings, when confronted with the truth, never respond with apathy. They either embrase it as a life-giving power, or they become defensive as if the power of the fact itself is personally threatening.

In this case, my comment can't have been personally threatening to you, it's just a fact that we have no original sources to test. But you responded defensively and so I must assume that you feel somehow threatened. This must be why you're powerless to respond intellectually--you have nothing to respond with.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes

Mental flatliner
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by Mental flatliner » Sat May 17, 2014 9:40 am

spin wrote: You have no sense of irony.
Explain it then.

Challenge yourself an make an academic contribution to the discussion.

User avatar
spin
Posts: 1865
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by spin » Sat May 17, 2014 9:52 am

Mental flatliner wrote:
spin wrote: You have no sense of irony.
Explain it then.
You have done nothing else but give purely defensive responses to points of logic that you failed to address. Here you failed to grasp the fact that another translation of Josephus was asked for. You haven't supplied any. You just crapped on inanely about the stupidity of using a translation of something else, compounding the problem by introducing more complexities rather than helping it.
Mental flatliner wrote:Challenge yourself an make an academic contribution to the discussion.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 860
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by rakovsky » Fri Jul 07, 2017 4:22 pm

DCHindley wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:56 pm
steve43 wrote:Less accurate in any substantive way? Thanks for being specific.
If you want to think that a translation made in 1737 is just as accuirate as one made in the 19th, 20th or 21st century, good luck with that.

Whiston had lots of kooky ideas (Josephus was a secret Christian) and obsessions (mainly about chronology)! I know of a perfect example of his kookiness.
Josephus' relationship to Christianity is curious. I think he was probably a Christian sympathizer. Notice how in his passage on James he says that the best of the Judeans opposed James' execution.
Eisenman points out how Josephus repeatedly writes venerations of Epaphroditus, a figure with political power, and that an Epaphroditus is mentioned by Paul in the Epistles.

For example, in his autobiography, Josephus writes:
And this is the account of the actions of my whole life; and let others judge of my character by them as they please. But to thee, O Epaphroditus, (27) thou most excellent of men! do I dedicate all this treatise of our Antiquities; and so, for the present, I here conclude the whole.
Here is Phil. 20:
18. But I have all, and abound: I am full, having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, wellpleasing to God.

19. But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.

20. Now unto God and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

21. Salute every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren which are with me greet you.

22. All the saints salute you, chiefly they that are of Caesar's household.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2008
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Any other English translations of Josephus

Post by DCHindley » Fri Jul 07, 2017 9:00 pm

rakovsky wrote:
Fri Jul 07, 2017 4:22 pm
DCHindley wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:56 pm
Whiston had lots of kooky ideas (Josephus was a secret Christian) and obsessions (mainly about chronology)! I know of a perfect example of his kookiness.
Josephus' relationship to Christianity is curious. I think he was probably a Christian sympathizer. Notice how in his passage on James he says that the best of the Judeans opposed James' execution.

Eisenman points out how Josephus repeatedly writes venerations of Epaphroditus, a figure with political power, and that an Epaphroditus is mentioned by Paul in the Epistles.

For example, in his autobiography, Josephus writes:
And this is the account of the actions of my whole life; and let others judge of my character by them as they please. But to thee, O Epaphroditus, (27) thou most excellent of men! do I dedicate all this treatise of our Antiquities; and so, for the present, I here conclude the whole.
Epaphroditus was a freedman of the imperial household, tasked with being Josephus' patron. The name, I do not think, is extraordinarily rare or anything. Of course, what if the assumptions are reversed? Maybe the NT was alluding to Josephus?

Wm. Whiston, the translator of the best known English versions of Josephus' works, thought that Josephus was a closet Christian, but he also wrote in 1737, not an especially critical period of time. He also took the account of Jesus in Ant 18 as Josephus' own words, something that is generally no longer held.

DCH

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests