Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Malachi151 · 04-12-2008, 03:15 PM

The passage in question.

Quote:

But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death 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 also, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.
- The Annals; Tacitus, 109

Comment on this passage by J.P. Meier, Catholic theologian and historical Jesus scholar who does believe in the existence of a historical Jesus:

Quote:

Tacitus and Pliny the Younger reflect instead what they have heard Christians of their own day say. Despite various claims, no early rabbinic text (the earliest being the Mishna, composed ca. A.D. 200) contains information about Jesus, and later rabbinic texts simply reflect knowledge of, and mocking midrash on, Christian texts and preaching.
- The Present State of the ‘Third Quest’ for the Historical Jesus: Loss and Gain; J.P. Meier, 1999

Peter Kirby · 04-12-2008, 03:19 PM

If the quote is correct and if Meier is correct, one implication is that before 110 CE, Christians were saying that Christ was executed by Pilate.

2-J · 04-12-2008, 03:36 PM

.... which would tie in with 'mainstream' datings of the gospels...

Peter Kirby · 04-12-2008, 03:42 PM

However, if Meier is not correct, then it need not be proof of Christian hearsay. It's possible that Tacitus or one of his non-Christian peers made up the outlined story of Christus to explain the origin of the Christian sect. While this is not the most likely option to my mind, it does demonstrate a deficiency of the polling options.

aa5874 · 04-12-2008, 04:05 PM

I do not know whether 15.44 is authentic or not but it says nothing about Jesus at all. Did not vote, not enough choices.

Malachi151 · 04-12-2008, 04:43 PM

Peter what the hell? Why did you vote for option 2? That doesn't seem to jive with what you said in the thread?

Also, yes there are more possibilities but these are the main basics. I didn't want to put "other" and just have everyone pick that since the issue is obviously a complicated one.

Peter Kirby · 04-12-2008, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Peter what the hell? Why did you vote for option 2? That doesn't seem to jive with what you said in the thread?

Also, yes there are more possibilities but these are the main basics. I didn't want to put "other" and just have everyone pick that since the issue is obviously a complicated one.

I was looking for the closest option to 'other'.

spin · 04-12-2008, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2-J

.... which would tie in with 'mainstream' datings of the gospels...

There are enough things that militate against the mainstream datings of the gospels. The most damning being the existence of the earliest heresies, docetism and ebionism, neither possible given the existence of lots of gospel material. Even Mk, the earliest gospel, features the torn curtain in the temple, a symbol of the overthrow of the temple, not possible before 70 CE. The mainstream datings are strictly apologetic, as really is the case form the palaeographic dating of P52. From the earliest patristic literature we get no inkling of tangible gospel material. We have to wait for Irenaeus's claims against Macion's gospel for an acknowledgement of Lk and gospels start entering history. Some or all may have existed before then, but we have to accommodate them with the development of the earliest heresies which some gospel material is specifically aimed at.

spin

judge · 04-13-2008, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2-J

.... which would tie in with 'mainstream' datings of the gospels...

There are enough things that militate against the mainstream datings of the gospels. The most damning being the existence of the earliest heresies, docetism and ebionism, neither possible given the existence of lots of gospel material.

I did see you ask a question about this recently "Could sincere believers of later considered heresies have held their ideals if there was a gospel tradition to provide clear contrary information to those ideals?" here .

Now you seem to have jumped from asking the question to believing it to be impossible, IIUC.

Is there some new evidence or arguments to show it was impossible?

Malachi151 · 04-13-2008, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2-J

.... which would tie in with 'mainstream' datings of the gospels...

There are enough things that militate against the mainstream datings of the gospels. The most damning being the existence of the earliest heresies, docetism and ebionism, neither possible given the existence of lots of gospel material. Even Mk, the earliest gospel, features the torn curtain in the temple, a symbol of the overthrow of the temple, not possible before 70 CE. The mainstream datings are strictly apologetic, as really is the case form the palaeographic dating of P52. From the earliest patristic literature we get no inkling of tangible gospel material. We have to wait for Irenaeus's claims against Macion's gospel for an acknowledgement of Lk and gospels start entering history. Some or all may have existed before then, but we have to accommodate them with the development of the earliest heresies which some gospel material is specifically aimed at.

spin

I thought that dating GMark at or after 70 CE was mainstream...

View Poll Results: What is your position on the Tacitus passage
If authentic, it is proof that Jesus existed (I think its authentic)	3	12.00%
If authentic, it is proof that Jesus existed (I DON'T think its authentic)	1	4.00%
If authentic, it is only proof of Christian hearsay (I think its authentic)	8	32.00%
If authentic, it is only proof of Christian hearsay (I DON'T think its authentic)	13	52.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-12-2008, 03:19 PM	#2
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	If the quote is correct and if Meier is correct, one implication is that before 110 CE, Christians were saying that Christ was executed by Pilate.

04-12-2008, 03:36 PM	#3
2-J Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: UK Posts: 179	.... which would tie in with 'mainstream' datings of the gospels...

04-12-2008, 03:42 PM	#4
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	However, if Meier is not correct, then it need not be proof of Christian hearsay. It's possible that Tacitus or one of his non-Christian peers made up the outlined story of Christus to explain the origin of the Christian sect. While this is not the most likely option to my mind, it does demonstrate a deficiency of the polling options.

04-12-2008, 04:05 PM	#5
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	I do not know whether 15.44 is authentic or not but it says nothing about Jesus at all. Did not vote, not enough choices.

04-12-2008, 04:43 PM	#6
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Peter what the hell? Why did you vote for option 2? That doesn't seem to jive with what you said in the thread? Also, yes there are more possibilities but these are the main basics. I didn't want to put "other" and just have everyone pick that since the issue is obviously a complicated one.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.