I have updated the post discussing Tim O’Neill’s Non Sequitur discussion of the Ascension of Isaiah.
Response #3: Non Sequitur’s Tim O’Neill presentation, The Ascension of Isaiah
The following two tabs change content below.
Neil Godfrey
Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.
Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)
- Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 4: Did Jesus Exist? - 2024-11-27 08:20:47 GMT+0000
- Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 3: Prediction and History - 2024-11-24 09:10:07 GMT+0000
- Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 2: Certainty and Uncertainty in History - 2024-11-18 01:15:24 GMT+0000
If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!
Neil, there appears to be two spelling typos, that should be: vidi, cognoverunt.
I copied and pasted the Latin text from the Italian publication, Bettiolo, Paolo. 1995. Ascensio Isaiae: textus. Turnhout: Brepols. (Does v in place of u represent an Anglicization of the Latin orthography? — (is orthography the right word?))
It is v per Bettiolo, Paolo; Norelli, Enrico (1995). Ascensio Isaiae: Textus. Turnhout: Brepols. p. 430.
• Page 231 is from section: La Visio Isaiaa dell’edizione curata a Venezia nel 1522 da Antonio de Fantis [This text was printed at Venice in 1522 and edited by Antonio de Fantis]
It is v per Dillmann, August, ed. (1877). “Visio Isaiae e Monacensi editionis Venetae exemplari descripta.”. Ascensio Isaiae, Aethiop. et Lat., cum prolegomenis, adnotationibus, additis versionum Lat. reliquiis, ed. al A. Dillmann. p. 82.
And per Gieseler, J. C. L., & Dieterich, H. (1832). Academiae Georgiae Augustae Prorector cum Senatu Sacra pentecostalia anni 1832 pie celebranda indicunt : Inest vetus translatio latina Visionis Jesaiae, libri V.T. pseudepigraphi. p. 18
Antonius De Fantis (1522). “Visio mirabilis Ysaie Prophete“. Opera nuper in lucem prodeuntia. Venice: J. de Leuco. p. 103–112.
My transcription:
&
vidi similem filii homis
&
cum hominus habitare in mundo
&
non cognoverunt eum
If it’s a big enough serious deal I will probably change it but my understanding, limited though it is I well know, is that there has been something of a teacup war over whether u or v is the appropriate letter. Tim might be horrified to hear me say this, but there are no divinely ordained commandments concerning grammar and orthography. The only justification for them today is to serve the interests of standardization since the advent of the printing press. With new technologies enough room for variability can (and is being) built into systems to cater for variations. 🙂
I see now that page 231 (above screen-shot), is ‘V’ in the upper case, ‘u’ in the lower case.
Tim O’Neill said
Except ‘the son of man’ in the Ascension of Isaiah might not be the Jesus of Nazareth –
ie. it is as likely (or, perhaps, even more likely) to be reference to another entity; perhaps a celestial, angelic being.