Soul Invictus

I was perusing the net and ran into these two:

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html

and

http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm ( I believe this link is to a member of an IIDB member)

Thoughts? Comments?

Toto

Bede has debated the question here, without convincing anyone. The tektonics site is well known here, and has not converted anyone that we know.

Do you have any specific questions?

Soul Invictus

I do. I'm going to go over the tektonics site and probably play devil's advocate (if I think that it's possible). I just wanted to see who is familiar with it. I'll try to have something up shortly.

Peter Kirby

Do you mean "Devil's Advocate" in the sense of replying to JPH (tektonics), or "Devil's Advocate" in the sense of attempting to use the tektonics material to defend a historicist position? It should be interesting either way.

best,
Peter Kirby

Soul Invictus

I mean it in the sense of using their material to defend the historicist position. I haven't looked at it yet, however your best offense is a good defense, and that's what I'm trying to solidify. Once I look over it, I'll see if I can think of any reasons to continue holding their belief pattern.

Soul Invictus

The first article made a lot of strawmen statements, so it's going to be a bit tough. I guess I'll jump straight to their points of reference.

Tektonics references Tacitus and Josephus as highly reliable sources. While I believe I read that Josephus' reference was very miniscule in nature with respect to entirety of his records, I believe that his work is considered to be forged and/or not authentic. Please confirm.

Secondly, why do you not find Tacitus as a reputable and reliable reference to attest to the existence of Jesus, known as the Christ? This follows for Thallus, Pliny (the Elder presumably), and Lucian.

This is tougher than I thought.

Peter Kirby

See my Josephus page: Josephus

Since Josephus wrote hundreds of thousands of words, yes, the passage is a small percentage of the total text. That in itself is not an argument.

Pliny the Younger, actually. Why not read his letter and Trajan's reply, then let us know what you think? (Pliny)

Julius Africanus alludes to something said by Thallus. Richard Carrier has a piece on this in the Secular Web.

Lucian of Samosata would be terrific if he wrote around 70 CE rather than around 170 CE.

May I make a suggestion? Focus on the positive case of Earl Doherty and the critique of JPH. Let JPH take the defensive position, and see if that holds up. I think that is where the most interesting argument lies, since the external references to Jesus have been discussed at length (maybe at a rate of ten thousand words to one on the Josephus passage for example).

best,
Peter Kirby

Layman

That is one page in Bede's "Did Jesus Exist?" section. There are around 10 other articles, some specifically responding to Doherty and others generally responding to the Jesus Myth. There is also a page of reviews of Jesus Myth websites and books.

http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusindex.htm

Layman

If interested in Josephus, you might also try my article on the subject at Bede's Library:

http://www.bede.org.uk/Josephus.htm

I think it is pretty good (at the very least pretty thorough), even though unworthy of mention on Kirby's Josephus page.

Peter Kirby

Layman though you may be, your essay is indeed worthy. I am just lazy. Though, as you shall see, I shall add your essay promptly, I guarantee, now that I have some time free.

Sincerely,
Peter Kirby