Artemus

This quoted text was not in the page you linked, but rather a secondary link. I only scanned it before, and when I saw the Meier reference I gave up. My bad. Reading further down, it gives other alleged relations between Josephus and Luke or Tacitus that are just as speculative as the ones in the other links. It includes disclaimers such as
Initial acknowledges that arguments are highly speculative later disappear. "An interesting hypothesis" morphs into "it becomes apparent", "in all likelihood" soon reappears as "Most certainly", and "the distinct possibility" becomes "quite likely".

The attempts to rationalize away the places where no link, no matter how speculative, can be formulated in particular stand out:
The attempt to spin away the fact that the phrase "tribe of Christians" is absolutely incompatible with a Testimonium without "He was the Christ" made me dizzy, as it always does when someone argues this. (And yes, I know about the controversial Antiquities 18 passage.) And of course the problems that Amaleq13 points out are ignored altogether.

Regarding the explanation of Tacitus misstatement of Pilate's title, from the third (not second) link:
Honestly, doesn't that sound just a tad bit speculative to you?

No, a rebuttal is not in order. The arguments presented are speculation that ultimately rely on "well, it could be true". The problems listed both in the links themselves and by Amaleq13 make an equally compelling argument of "well, it might not be true, either". In such a case, the burden of proof lies entirely with those making the claim. The bottom line is that the recovered Testimonium cannot currently be proven valid due to a lack of evidence. A convincing case is going to require the discovery of a new document from the era of Josephus so that tampering had not yet occured. Until that happens, this is little more than academic masturbation.

(Note: A "Secret Mark" type discovery would not be convincing. "Oops, I lost the original" would also be laughable in any other discipline.)

Inadequate under what standards? The standards of New Testament era scholarship? Maybe so. The standards in virtually any other area of research? Not hardly. Which was the point of my first post in the first place.

Chris Weimer

Just wanted to point out XTalk is currently discussing the TF at my mentioning, especially noting the mini-synoptic. Ken Olsen's first reply is of a real great interest.

Amaleq13

Donde esta el linko, amigo?

Chris Weimer

Not since you spoke to me in the inferior tongue. Ask that question in Latin and you'll receive your reply. :Cheeky:

Forget it, you probably don't even know Latin.

My question
Ken Olsen's reply

Amaleq13

Only the pig variety.


Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas