mountainman

More interesting information - thanks.

I'd like to ask whether the original Greek for these references
above might also somehow resolve to be related to the issue
outlined in the thread what is the difference between Χριστός and χρηστός ?

These are the two Greek words for "anointed" or the latin "Christus"
in the Χριστός, but with the change of one letter, and no substantial
change in the pronunciation, the word χρηστός. This last word means
essentially "good" (in the sense of ethical) and its Latin equivalent
if the word "Chrestus".

Greek Inscriptions sometimes refer to "Sotas the Good" for example
which is the Greek χρηστός and has often been confused with the
other Χριστός, and thus often seen as "christian-related".

I am wondering whether for example, the original greek referred
to the pagan ruler Cyrus the Great as "the good" (chrestus - Latin)
by using the word χρηστός

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Toto

χρηστός has implications of "useful." It was a favorite name for slaves. I doubt that it would have be used to describe Cyrus the Great. Cyrus would more likely be described as "annointed."

andrewcriddle

See also Pseudo-Hegesippus book 5
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/he...s_05_book5.htm
There is some connection between the Slavonic Jewish War and Pseudo-Hegesippus but it is extremely obscure just what it is.

Andrew Criddle

DCHindley

I think this question was investigated at great length by Robert Eisler back in the early 1930's. I came across it in the English translation of his work, _Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist_. He felt the Slavonic version was influenced by Josephus' Aramaic language _Capture of Jerusalem_, but thinks that Pseudo Hegesippus is just a Latin paraphrase of War, if I am not mistaken. The book is packed away at the moment.

DCH

Toto

You have a rare copy of Eisler's work. Is it out of copyright?

Robert_Eisler

DCHindley

I have a rare *photocopy* of Eisler's work.

The Cleveland Public Library had a non-circulating copy. I went upstairs to a section of old dewey-decimal books that were not in general circulation, and found a second copy. A little persuasion later, they let me check it out --- straight to a copy shop.

The ET was published in 1933, so I believe it is out of copyright.

DCH

r333

According to http://members.aol.com/SHinrichs9/critic7.pdf

Each of the critics points have been directly addressed. The criticism addressed is the best known that the extensive organization of critical biblical scholars have to offer. Section 2 eliminated all the natural causes except an indeterministic natural explanation. The effects of the unknowns have been conservatively considered in determining the estimated probability of 0.00356 for an indeterministic natural explanation. Such a low probability supports eliminating an indeterministic natural explanation. According to the Ref. 17 description assigned to probability ranges, this maximum conservative probability calculation is not compelling but is remarkable. Thus, there remarkable evidence for rejecting ~E as true which implies ~D is true which means there is remarkable evidence that a supernatural intelligence intended Jesus to fulfill the Daniel 9:25 messianic prophecy. Thus, the Daniel 9:25 prophecy fulfillment is remarkable evidence that points to Jesus as the Messiah. Within the unknowns there is clearly the possibility that this prediction was essentially exact. As for as I am aware (see Section 4.1 of Ref. 17), this probability is the lowest associated with any major claims that there is a super natural intelligence that has intervened with a purpose for humans. Thus, as far as I am aware, this evidence qualifies as extraordinary evidence for an extraordinary claim. Daniel's Messiah in a remarkable way has survived a visit with the lions in the critic’s den.

aa5874

Can you give the historical source for Daniel's Messiah? At least two prominent Jewish writers, Philo and Josephus, wrote about events in the first century and never mentioned Daniel's Messiah as Jesus of Nazareth, son of the ghost. Although the desolation of Jerusalem and the fall of the temple at 70CE may have been considered as the fulfillment of Daniel's so-called prophecy, the historical evidence will show that Josephus thought or wrote that some Roman Emperor may be the Messiah.

See post #7, and read DCHindley's reply. This Jesus, son of the Ghost, cannot be accounted for in history.