Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by turtonm: I don't need to present a more plausible scenario. All your claims about the 'wise king' being Jesus are based on your particular interpretation of that passage. There is no "specific reference' there. We both know that. You are the one making the claims.

Michael,

It appears as though we are now talking past each other. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I claimed these sources were completely independent and uninfluenced by Christian traditions. I never made such a claim. My point throughout this entire thread has been that none of the non-Christians making reference to Jesus ever seem to have doubted his existence.

Despite your pleas to the contrary, you have made a claim regarding Serapion – specifically that he was NOT referring to Jesus. He gives three examples – Socrates, Pythagoras, and the un-named king of the Jews. If you can’t provide a better candidate than Jesus as king of the Jews, then it remains as the most plausible one.

The same thing goes for the “Chrestus” reference in Suetonius. The person appears to be a Jew in Rome in the 40’s C.E. I think you are correct in saying that Suetonius probably thinks Chrestus was actually alive in Rome at the time. He was wrong on this count. Suetonius is not known for being nearly as accurate as Tacitus in utilizing his information. However, since it is very doubtful that “Chrestus” was ever used by Jews as a name it becomes possible that it is a reference to Jesus. When we add to this the fact that there are many instances of “Chrestus” being mistaken for “Christus” in other sources, it adds to the plausibility of my thesis. The similarities between “Chrestus” and “Christus” or “Chrestian” and “Christian” were so close that we have many instances of Christian scribes erroneously writing the wrong ones – even when copying biblical passages. I can look up the actual manuscripts if you’d like. This doesn’t prove Suetonius made the same mistake, but it makes it very possible. We have no other record of possible candidates for this reference. I’m not dogmatic on this one, but the most likely reference would seem to be Jesus.

Lucian of Samosata makes numerous references to Jesus and Christians. The main point of “Death of Peregrinus” is to mock Jesus and Christianity. There is much more to this writing than the portion you posted. I can’t find it on the internet, but I’d be glad to refer you to some books if you’re really that interested in the topic. “Death of Peregrinus” is about a Greek philosopher (Peregrinus) who converted to Christianity and duped a bunch of Christians out of their money. Lucian claims to have known Peregrinus. Peregrinus gets arrested for some reason and at first the Christians stick by him (because of their stupidity according to Lucian). Peregrinus eventually abandons Christianity and kills himself. Lucian refers to Jesus as “that crucified sophist” among other things in the rest of the story.

I’ve intentionally avoided asking you any other questions in this post because I’m still waiting for you to answer the question I’ve asked you two other times in this thread. Do you believe Jesus existed? If so, then please tell me why you do. I though you told me not too long ago that you did believe he existed.

Peace,

Polycarp

Michael,

I have those manuscript references I mentioned. Codex Sinaiticus mistakenly writes “Chrestian” instead of “Christian” on three occasions – Acts 11:26, Acts 26:8, and 1 Peter 4:16. Manuscript P72 of 1 Peter 2:3 makes a similar mistake for “Christ” by writing “Chrest”. In addition, there are 3rd century funerary inscriptions uncovered in Phyrgia which primarily list the deceased as “Christians”. However, there are some which erroneously have “Chrestians”. There is also one that has it both ways. As Ish already pointed out, Tertullian tells us it was a common mistake for non-Christians to say “Chrestus” instead of “Christus”.

Peace,

Polycarp

Seems to me that the outside evidence of Jesus Christ is simply too scanty. Which is at odds with the portrayal of him in the Gospels as a big celebrity.

Pity we don't have Pontius Pilate's memoirs or something like that

Polycarp, what is your source for these corruptions? I quickly glanced at the UBS 4th and couldn't find them listed in the variants listed below. I might have overlooked them. Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament presents the Greek for Codex Bezae which spells Christians: chi, rho, epsilon, iota, tau, iota, alpha, nu, omikron, iota (Chreistianoi - "Chreistians"). How is it spelled in the ones you mention? I think I have a picture of P72, so I may take a look at it.

Just curious what your source was for this too.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be difficult, I would just like to have the information for future use.

Thanks!
Ish

[This message has been edited by Ish (edited April 23, 2001).]

NOMAD: Let's look at the passage in question on more time, as you appear to be serious confused about the one I am talking about:

There was a group, loathed for its vices, that the people called Christians. Responsible for the name was Christ; he had been put to death by Pontius Pilate when Tiberius was emperor. This checked the horrid superstition, but not for long; it burst out again, not only in Judaea where it had started, but in Rome, too, a sink into which everything vile and shameful flows and finds its vogue. [Tacitus, Annals 15.44]

Pilate's title is not listed. Now, since Tacitus makes a simple statement, namely that Jesus was executed by Pilate during the reign of Tiberius (all true BTW), why reject it? Because he did not give more details than this? On what basis did you decide that he needed to do this?

EARL: Uh, what translation are you working from, Nomad? All the translations I've read of Annals 15.44 do mention the false title, "procurator." For example, (1) from http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.11.xv.html :

"Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."

(2) from http://www.bible-history.com/quotes/..._others_1.html :

"Christus, the founder of that name, was put to death as a criminal by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome…"

(3) from http://users.binary.net/polycarp/jesus.html :

"The author of the denomination was Christ[us] who had been executed in Tiberius time by the Procurator Pontius Pilate. The pestilent superstition, checked for a while, burst out again, not only throughout Judea...but throughout the city of Rome also..."

(4) from http://www.historicjesus.com/glossar...iuspilate.html (which also falsely says that "Tiberius appointed Pontius Pilate the fifth procurator of Judea"):

"Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus" (Tacitus, The Annals, XV, 44, translated by Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb, Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952).

(5) from http://members.aol.com/PS418/dje.html :

"Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberias at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilatus, but the pernicious superstition, thus checked for a moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the native land of the monstrosity, but also in Rome, to which all conceivable horrors and abominations flow from every side"

****

And here most importantly is the Latin, from http://www.gmu.edu/departments/fld/C...c.ann15.html#1 [the eighth word is "procurator"]:

"auctor nominis eius Christus Tibero imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat; repressaque in praesens exitiablilis superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque."

I typed the quotation directly from The Four Witnesses, by Robin Griffith-Jones. I would have to look up the page number (as I do not have the book with me right now).

I have checked with another source, Malhon Smith's site at http://religion.rutgers.edu/iho/jesus.html#Nero and my quotation appears to be in error.

I apologize. Pilate is incorrectly identified by Tacitus as the procurator of Judaea, when his actual title was governor. It was my mistake for not checking this more carefully.

This brings me to a follow up question however:

Since the Gospels identify Pilate as the governor of Judaea (Matt 27:10, Luke 3:1, John 18:28), why would this error by Tacitus be attributed to Christians?

Nomad

I'm confused what 2 of those 3 verses have anything to do with Pilate's title?? Am I misreading? Only Luke calls Pilate the gov.


Oh wait, I was reading the KJV, and not the NIV...Different version of the inerrant word...my mistake

[This message has been edited by outtawork_Home (edited April 23, 2001).]

Hmm... you guys are making me paranoid about my quotes now.

In the KJV, Pilate is identified as the governor in Matthew, Luke and John 28:10. Matt does so no less than 8 times, starting with Matthew 27:2.

And just to be certain, I looked up procurator under the NIV, NASB, KJV and RSV Bibles, and found no instances where this title was ever used (for Pilate or anyone else).

Nomad

You're not really paranoid if they are really after you :-) I'm not trying to ride you, I was just following up on your info... Also, John only goes to chapter 21, not 28.

In my searches the word governor is only used twice in John in the KJV, and neither of them refer to Pilate, and concerning the passage in Luke.. I was always under the impression that Herod was king, not tetrarch. Do they mean the same thing?

Should I not use the KJV? Is there a "more reliable" version?

Edit to fix a typo

[This message has been edited by outtawork_Home (edited April 23, 2001).]

ARGGH!!!!

Now I gotta watch for my typos too. It is not John 28:10, it is John 18:28.

Yeesh.

It has been a long day. Sorry.

Nomad