GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives
Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-07 > 1090075994
From: (Dirk Hartog)
Subject: Re: Jesus
Date: 17 Jul 2004 07:53:14 -0700
References: <1e2.255590ce.2e26e482@aol.com> <20040714194956.31395.qmail@web41710.mail.yahoo.com> <ac1a3786.0407150822.83f9817@posting.google.com>
(Jared Linn Olar) wrote in message news:<>...
> (Francisco Antonio Doria) wrote in message news:<>...
> > No, there is no historical evidence; just an
> > interpolation in Josephus, IIRR - an obvious one, btw.
>
> On the contrary, apart from the historical evidence provided by the
> Gospels, New Testament epistles, and first century A.D. Christian
> writings,
Is the Bhagavad-Gita evidence that the Krishna myths are true? If
not, why not?
Is the Kitab-i-Aqudas evidence that the Bahai myths are true? If not,
why not?
Is the Book of Mormon evidence that the LDS myths are true? If not,
why not?
> we also have Suetonius' reference to "Chrestus," Tacitus'
> reference to the Christians being named after "Christus" who was
> executed by Pontius Pilate, and
Not evidence of Christ, surely. Evidence of Christianity.
Everybody agrees there were Christians in the late first and early
second century. People -- Suetoius and Tacitus are two -- wrote about
them and their myths. How exactly would you expect someone to
describe an odd new cult to people who didn't know anything about the
cult, without mentioning the cult's peculiar beliefs?
For example, in 1997 the New York Times, Time, Newsweek, etc. all
wrote about the Heaven's Gate cult, mentioning the space-gods cult
members believed were coming to earth in the trail of the Hale-Bop
comet. Do you think the New York Times, Time, Newsweek articles are
evidence that the comet-Gods actually existed? If not, why is
Suetonius mentioning the Jesus cult's legendary founder evidence that
that God actually existed?
-------
#2 Tacitus says Pilate was procurator. He wasn't. Pilate was a
prefect. Is this evidence Pilate was procurator? Or is it evidence
Tacitus wasn't much of a fact checker?
Tacitus says the Christians were notorious in their abominations. Is
this evidence the Christians _were_ notorious in their abominations?
If not, why not? How do you pick which of Tacitus' statements are
evidence of things and which aren't?
Tacitus says Pompeii was destroyed by an earthquake, not by a volcano.
Is this evidence Pompeii was destroyed by an earthquake, not by a
volcano? Or is it evidence Tacitus wasn't much of a fact checker?
Tacitus says Augustus was divine. Is this evidence Augustus was
divine? Tacitus says Nero was divine. Is this evidence Nero was
divine? Or do you only believe Tactius' religious pronouncements when
they agree with what you already believe?
> Josephus' reference to the death of
> St. James, "the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ."
That confirms exactly what it says -- that by the end of the century
there were Christians around who called Jesus the Christ. Everybody
agrees there were Christians around by then. People wrote about them,
vaguely, and their myths. So what?
>As I mention
> in another post the interpolation in Josephus, the Testimonium
> Flavianum as it is called, very probably existed in an uninterpolated
> form.
One reason the TF is recognized as a fraud is that no Church Father
knew about it until the fourth century -- when Eusebius alone knows of
it -- then it takes another century or two for everyone else to find
out about it:
"It is, then, significant that, although this paragraph [the
Testimonium Flavianum] will have suited the purposes of the Church
Fathers admirably, particularly in polemics against the Jews, none
before Eusebius (in the fourth century) quotes it... Feldman names two
Fathers from the second century, seven from the third, and two from
the early fourth, all of whom knew Josephus and cited his works, but
"do not refer to this passage, though one would imagine it would be
the first passage that a Christian apologist would cite' ([Feldman,
L.H., Josephus and Modern Scholarship, 1937- 1980. Berlin and New
York: De Gruyter.], p 695). He adds that, even after Eusebius, three
fourth century Fathers and five from the fifth century (up to and
including Augustine) often cite Josephus, but not this passage."
[Wells, George A.. The Jesus Myth (1999), pg. 201- 2]
amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0812693922/paganoriginofthe
And there's good reason to believe Eusebius is it's actual author:
"None of the Fathers before Eusebius used the word 'tribe' in
reference to Christians, as it is used in this passage [the
Testimonium Flavianum, Antiquities 18.3.3 "And the tribe of
Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day"]. But
neither does it fit Josephus's usage well, for he used 'tribe' of
national groups -- such as the Jews, the Taurians, the Parthians.
Zeitlin argues that Eusebius himself -- the first witness to the
Testimonium -- introduced the word here. He shows that Eusebius had a
certain partiality for it, evidenced when he said that Trajan (in his
rescript to Pliny concerning how to deal w9ith Christians) and
Tertullian (in his report of Trajan's rescript) both wrote of "the
tribe of Christians". When if fact neither Trajan nor Tertullian had
used the work 'tribe.' 'Tribe' then, was an expression Eusebius was
ready to put into the mouth of a non-Christian writer with reference
to Christians. Feldman notes that other phrases in the Testimonium
have been held to be characteristic not of Josephus, but of Eusebius.
([Feldman, L.H., Flavius Josephus Revisited. ANRW II, 21, 2, pg
821-838: Josephus on the Origins of Christianity ], pg 827)"
[Wells, George A.. The Jesus Myth (1999), pg. 206]
amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0812693922/paganoriginofthe
> There is more than enough historical evidence for the existence
> of a Jewish teacher or "rabbi" named Jesus, who was crucified by
> Pontius Pilate, and whose followers became the first members of the
> Christian religion.
Interesting theory. Can you list please the evidence you have in mind
for:
1. Jesus existence
2. His rabbi-ness
3. His crucifixion by Pilate
> In fact, there is more and better evidence for
> the origins of Christianity than there is for any other major religion
> of the ancient world.
Can you list please the evidence on which you base this claim?
Dirk Hartog
---------------------
I don't care what you believe.
I care what the evidence is.
I care about the reasoning you use to justify your beliefs.
It is not morally acceptable to say ... our story is truth but yours
is myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally
acceptable to ... manufactur[e] defensive or protective strategies
that apply only to one's own story.
[John Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1998, pg 28 - 29]
-
This thread: