Minimalist

I agree, MM but why not give them what they want? It boosts sales. Write a story about how Pliny tortured a few xtians and learned all about jesus and mary and pilate and how they all said "Screw Rome, I'd rather die." Christina Moss points out that this story developed in the 4th-5th centuries and was fully evolved by the 15th century.

mountainman

The "they" of the 4th century were different from the "they" of the 9th and the "they" of the 15th, etc.

I have been guilty of focussing to much on antiquity, and forgetting to check the ms traditions.

Are we truly dealing with a case of ....... the ......... "Immaculate Transmission"



I still think the answer is directly related to George Orwell's "He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past." and relates to the consolidation of power and the elimination of any opposition.

I would like to see whether Christina Moss mention Pseudo-Isidore (who would go to many elaborate and long-winded lengths to nestle his forgery amidst known manuscripts). A study of "motivation for forgery" here is interesting.

The names, dates, motive, means, opportunity and modus operandi of those historical figures standing behind *SOME OF* the historically known and identified forgery mills of "authentic Christian manuscripts" are now largely out in the open - at least with this massive 9th century example of pious forgery.


Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible ... By Bart D. Ehrman




BTW thanks for the links to "Hannibal the Victor".

andrewcriddle

Unless we accept Eusebius' precise chronology, (which is at least partly guesswork), there is no reason for dating the death of Ignatius before (or during) Pliny's governorship of Bithynia. It probably occurred a few years later.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

I don't have current access to Sherwin-White but I'm pretty sure that this quote is in context not about whether the letters are really by Pliny but whether they were genuinely sent to the supposed recipients. I.E. are the letters real correspondence between Pliny and friends or are they literary exercises by Pliny ?

This issue is probably irrelevant to book 10. It is most unlikely that Pliny composed pretend letters from him to Trajan plus pretend replies from Trajan.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

It is not that Pliny pretends to write to himself but that a forger pretends to be Pliny just like people pretended to be or falsely attributed writings to Paul, Seneca, Josephus, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Jude, Peter, and James.

Tom Verenna

Wow, that is really a stretch. Bob thinks a lot of inconvenient things are interpolations. I'm not sure how valid such arguments are, nor how useful they might be when given context. I like Bob, but I wish he would tone it down a bit.

aa5874

So who determines valid arguments? Are you implying that the tone of an argument assures validity? Please explain what is "tone" or your own tone.

I would think 'tone' varies and is highly subjective.

Toto

But that's just it - Pliny is not at all inconvenient to mythicism.

mountainman

The letter exchange between King Agbar and Jesus was once very brazenly convenient but alas times have changed. The letter exchange between "Dear Paul" and "Dear Seneca" was once very brazenly convenient but alas times have moved forward. The "TF" in Josephus was once very brazenly convenient but alas attitudes have become more sceptical and less accepting of pious forgery. The references to the "Big J. and/or the nation of Christians" in Tacitus, Suetonus, Marcus Aurelius, the Pliny-Trajan correspondence, Cassius Dio and Galen were all very convenient for the ancient Christian organisation that preserved these references in their massive libraries of high technology (hand-written) codices.

"Here!" They would say to those, who seeking the historical truth, had enquired after evidence. "Here is the proof"! And if they needed any more proof after the 9th century, they requested a (temporary) inter-ecclesiastical-library loan from one of the best appointed monastic libraries in all of Carolingian Europe, the Corbie library.


The pious religious forgery mill has been a money and power spinner for aeons. We don't even need to accuse the 1st millennium of Christians of doing something that other pious forgers have not done in all other "book" religions (Quranic compilers, Smith et al) since time immemorial: that they have knowingly fabricated (manuscript and epigraphic) evidence to substantiate their own mythological history because they had the "divine right" to do so.

The historically fabricated jesus story seems to be a bit like the pot of gold that one always hears is at the end of the rainbow. Well the sun of critical questioning is on the rise again, and the rainbow is fast dissolving into the heavens above.


I like Bob too, but I wish he would turn up the heat a little.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woody Allen To you I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lenny Bruce Every day people are straying away from the church and going back to God.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arius of Alexandria CENSORED by Bullneck of Bullneckinople.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emperor Julian CENSORED by Bishop Cyril of Alexandria.

Stuart

Mountainman,

You should consider that many of the writings of religious materials were not focused on historicity but upon revelations. There is some evidence that early Christianity was a combination of common sense (of the day) ethics and reading of the signs in the sky. Upon that is a layer of interpreting events in that context with the sense of shame upon losers of events of history.

But IMHO pious forgery only comes in when one deliberately changes prior sources to infect it with your belief of what happened and what is missing.

You are right on the list. But the problem comes when a religion has a need for historicity for its legitimacy. People get wrapped up in religion in exactly the same way they get wrapped up in sports or politics, and some find it hard to not cross the lines of ethically honest behavior, because they feel the ends justifies the means, or at least excuses it. Just my view.