FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page List of historians
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 2 of 5 1 2 34 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-27-2011, 09:00 AM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Virginia, USA
Posts: 166
Default
Bingo!

Thanks Kapyong, that's the one I was looking for.

And thanks too to DCHindley for your critique of that list.

The specific claim to historicity that I was addressing in another venue was the passage in the gospel of Matthew referencing the many saints who rose from the dead at the time of Jesus's death. By my way of thinking, that particular alleged event was so spectacular and public that had it actually occurred it would have generated comment from any number of sources. Given that specific event, would it be reasonable to expect then that at the very least Josephus (and possibly Philo) should have mentioned it?

Thanks again for everyone's help!
cornbread_r2 is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 09:06 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,037
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornbread_r2 View Post
The specific claim to historicity that I was addressing in another venue was the passage in the gospel of Matthew referencing the many saints who rose from the dead at the time of Jesus's death. By my way of thinking, that particular alleged event was so spectacular and public that had it actually occurred it would have generated comment from any number of sources. Given that specific event, would it be reasonable to expect then that at the very least Josephus (and possibly Philo) should have mentioned it?
How about Mark, Luke, John or Paul? You may be interested in this thread, which discusses the resurrected saints.
John Kesler is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 09:46 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kesler View Post

What, then, should we infer from Philo's failure to mention Paul?
That Paul was not so important that somebody like Herod was keen to personally meet him? Herod was allegedly keen to meet Jesus, who also allegedly brought Pharisees out into cornfields on Sabbaths to try to see what he and his disciples were up to.

But perhaps such an important Jesus never existed, and only Jesus the obscure existed.
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 06:08 PM   #14
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Virginia, USA
Posts: 166
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kesler View Post
How about Mark, Luke, John or Paul? You may be interested in this thread, which discusses the resurrected saints.
They were my trump cards. However, I'm now being told that the "many saints" who appeared to the "many persons" was really just a few saints appearing to just a few other people and they were too scared of the Jews to tell anyone else so the event didn't get recorded by anyone; plus the whole "different gospel authors emphasized different events" schtick. As a bonus, this tack also completely removes Paul because even though he might have been in Jerusalem at the time he wasn't one of the "few" witnesses.

I've got another couple of avenues to explore.

Thanks for your link!
cornbread_r2 is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 06:31 PM   #15
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default
Actually, anyone on this list might have mentioned Jesus in passing, as Lucian or Tacitus (allegedly) did.

DCH, it's really irrelevant who wrote as Damis. Really, Kapyong is asking what would the writer "damis" have possibly said?

Vorkosigan
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 07:43 PM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorkosigan View Post
Actually, anyone on this list might have mentioned Jesus in passing, as Lucian or Tacitus (allegedly) did.

DCH, it's really irrelevant who wrote as Damis. Really, Kapyong is asking what would the writer "damis" have possibly said?

Vorkosigan
Or they may just as well NOT have mentioned Jesus, even if they had heard of him. It's like a needle in a haystack.

Now I am not really sure I understand the point about "who wrote as Damis". Philostratus wrote the work that contains, as he asserts, the travel diary of Apollonius' travel companion "Damis". Of course, Philostratus doesn't say anything of Jesus or Paul either, in spite of some fairly strong parallels with the Gospels and Acts. On the other hand, that would be like admitting that he had borrowed from the writings of a banned sect to write an account for the emperor's wife!

DCH
DCHindley is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 10:02 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,779
Default
Gday,

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
Lots of SURELY/PROBABLY/PLAIN-OL' SHOULDS and COULDS there!
Yes indeed -
it's specifically a list of those who SHOULD have, or COULD have, mentioned Jesus,
I'm glad you noticed that :-)


Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
Kap, there are so many holes in this list you could use it to strain your spaghetti.
I don't agree.
My spaghetti is still under water, thanks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
AFAIK Philo also doesn't mention the Egyptian prophet, or any other pretender to kingship in Judea/Galilee mentioned by Josephus. The closest he comes is the unfavorable mention of Pilate's governing style in Judea, and events related to Gaius Caligula's attempt to erect a statue of himself in the temple in Jerusalem around 40 CE.
So?
There are indeed many minor nobodies who are NOT mentioned by various writers in my list. But Philo still says a lot about Jewish people and events and religion. If Jesus existed, and some of the stories had some basis in fact, then yes, I argue that he SHOULD be expected to have mentioned Jesus.

Anyway -
My case is cumulative - DOZENs of writers fail to mention Jesus.
(Well, over 2 dozen anyway :-)


Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
The forged correspondence between Seneca and Jesus is fairly late and reflected a time when Christian thinkers were trying to present their faith as a brand of philosophy. In the time of the real Seneca, there was nothing to draw his attention in the Jesus story any more than the stories of the messianic pretenders that Josephus speaks of.
Well, those ancient Christian disagreed with you, they thought that Seneca SHOULD have mentioned Jesus. Jesus allegedly taught some rather Stoic ideas - plenty of reasons that he could have mentioned Jesus teachings.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
Damis? It is not even certain that this "author" even existed! It seems to many critics that the simpleton Damis and his account of his travels with the Pythagorean philosopher Apollonius of Tyana was all conjured up by Philostratus, the early 3rd century sophist, to spice up his biography of Apollonius, who fascinated his patron, the empress Julia Domna, by serving as a foil for his own witty repartee about the figure of Apollonius. Even if Damis and his account did exist, it was a travel diary, not a philosophical treatise where the figure of Jesus might be expected to pop up. I'd more expect this diary to mention Paul.
How do you know it was merely a travel diary?
Do you have a copy we can look at?


Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
So, it seems to me that many folks on that list would be dealing with subject matters and issues far removed from any Jesus who might have lived and died in the barbarous lands of Galilee and Judea.
Thanks, I'm glad you agree with me.
Yes, many of my list are indeed just COULD HAVEs.
All sorts of stuff is mentioned in these old books. These writers DID sometimes mention minor nobodies from far away, like Pausanias mentioning a minor prophetess from Palestine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
If Ptolemy the 2nd century astronomer/astrologer was meant, perhaps some reference to the darkness that occurred after Jesus' death, might be expected. As far as I can recall, there was nothing that corresponded to an eclipse around the usually proposed dates of Jesus' death, etc.
There was an eclipse on November 24th, 29CE.


K.
Kapyong is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 10:05 PM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,779
Default
Gday,

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kesler View Post
What, then, should we infer from Philo's failure to mention Paul?
Well,
Philo had finished writing before Paul started writing.


K.
Kapyong is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 10:10 PM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,779
Default
Gday,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorkosigan View Post
Actually, anyone on this list might have mentioned Jesus in passing, as Lucian or Tacitus (allegedly) did.
Yup,
it's funny how on the one hand -
* HJers cite Roman historians and satirists mentioning Jesus as evidence,
but on the other hand ALSO -
* argue that Roman historians and satirists could not be expected to mention Jesus
:-)


K.
Kapyong is offline  
Old 11-27-2011, 10:50 PM   #20
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapyong View Post
...There was an eclipse on November 24th, 29CE.


K.
There can be NO ECLIPSE of the sun at the Passover or on the 14th day of Nissan.
aa5874 is offline  
 
Page 2 of 5 1 2 34 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:03 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.