James Still

It is my great pleasure to announce the publication of a paper on Tacitus' Fragment 2 by Eric Laupot (University of Alabama) entitled "Tacitus' Fragment 2: The Anti-Roman Movement of the Christiani and the Nazoreans" at http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...nazoreans.html.

[This message has been edited by James Still (edited May 08, 2001).]

Bede

James,

Link seems off.

B

The author is not listed in the library, and the search functions cannot find him.

Therefore I am defeated, and should slink back to my lair to nurse my wounds. But wait, let's try....

....Good old classics-L! Here is Laupot's post on his article that "solves the problem of the historical Jesus."

http://omega.cohums.ohio-state.edu:8080/hyper-lists/classics-l/00-12-01/0139.html# 0145qlink1

I think his claim that the Romans destroyed the Temple to suppress the Christian movement is....well, I'll let you do the commenting, Bede.

I did find this discussion, Bede, which I think you will enjoy. You can follow the links to the other comments.

http://omega.cohums.ohio-state.edu:8080/hyper-lists/classics-l/00-12-01/0145.html# 0146qlink1

Laupot's reply is here:

http://omega.cohums.ohio-state.edu:8...tml#0145qlink1

When you follow the links around, be careful to note that the subject changes, so you'll miss some posts. I suggest you click on the "Subject" view and look for all the "Jesus Quest" stuff.

Actually, it bounces around a number of different subject headings. This post is brutal:

http://omega.cohums.ohio-state.edu:8...2-01/0210.html

Yours in discourse,

Michael
[This message has been edited by turtonm (edited May 08, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by turtonm (edited May 08, 2001).]

Bede

'Twas ever thus. If someone comes up with something that warrants a 'Hm, I suppose that's quite interesting' they then feel the need to pile speculation on top and end up making utterly wild and improbable claims.

Every problem in evolutionary science causes creationists to predict its imminent demise and who can forget MacD and his foolishness about Homer (sorry, Michael - had to mention that).

Oh well. If frag 2 is genuine Tacitus (or if it isn't) I must admit to not really thinking it means much. We know Tacitus thought Christians were a foul superstitous lot so this reference looks fine to me. But in general, I want to see evidence for interpolation, not demands for proof it didn't happen.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

The link works just fine if you leave off the final period:

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...nazoreans.html

Cheers,

Kelly

Eric: Thus, Tacitus' fragment solves the problem of the historical Jesus -- he was an ideological founder of the first century CE Jewish resistance movement.

SWL: I'm wondering what in this fragment tells us specifically about the person Jesus of Nazareth?

SecWebLurker

It tells us that he was obviously a white guy with a brown beard, long hair, blue eyes, and wore white robes alot...

Lance

Interesting. This ties with Dr. Donini's publications on the historical Jesus as well as the "who is Barabbas" thread. Both are grabbling for the same ground.

It would start to appear that Jesus as a Messanic zealot is not a huge reach.

SWL and Lance, did you bother to read the links I put up? Laupot's conclusions were decisively rejected by his colleagues. It may or may not be true that Jesus was a revolutionary zealot "made over" by the gospels, but the Tacitus fragment does not bear on the issue.

Michael

turtonm: SWL and Lance, did you bother to read the links I put up?

Hi Mike,

No actually I didn't have the chance to read them yet. I was just wondering why someone would make the leap from a statement in Tacitus about some Christians to the program/aims of Jesus of Nazareth.

SecWebLurker