Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Steven Carr · 04-28-2012, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hjalti

I'm currently reading DJE? and I'm now reading over his discussion of the TF.

Like Carr points out, it makes little sense to say that Christians were named after Jesus, so the version of the TF Ehrman has produced (the one that simply erases, but doesn't modify "He was the Christ") can't work.

But later in that discussion, he mentions an argument from Doherty: Josephus would not speak in a neutral (or a positive!) tone about a seditious messianic pretender like Jesus!

How does Ehrman answer:

Quote:

But it needs to be stressed that in the possibly original form of the Testimonium there is not a word about Jesus being a messiah figure or even a political leader.

That's because you deleted it Bart!

That is so funny.

Perhaps Ehrman should have put a full stop in that sentence after the word 'Jesus' .?!?

andrewcriddle · 04-29-2012, 05:30 AM

Josephus does sometimes expect background knowledge in his readers. He may have expected them to know that Christians followed Jesus Christ.

As an example of Josephus requiring background knowledge see this passage from Antiquities book 17.

Quote:

He [Antipater] was persuaded by these last, and sailed on, and landed at the haven called Sebastus, which Herod had built at vast expenses in honor of Caesar, and called Sebastus

This requires the reader to realise that the Caesar involved is Augustus and that Sebastus is a Greek translation of Augustus.

Andrew Criddle

Vorkosigan · 04-29-2012, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Josephus does sometimes expect background knowledge in his readers. He may have expected them to know that Christians followed Jesus Christ.

As an example of Josephus requiring background knowledge see this passage from Antiquities book 17.

Quote:

He [Antipater] was persuaded by these last, and sailed on, and landed at the haven called Sebastus, which Herod had built at vast expenses in honor of Caesar, and called Sebastus

This requires the reader to realise that the Caesar involved is Augustus and that Sebastus is a Greek translation of Augustus.

Andrew Criddle

Why?

"In Taipei there is a major street called Luosifu Road named after a famous American president that runs into what used to be Jieshou Road, which was later renamed Ketegalen Road."

There, I've just told you that Roosevelt Road intersects a road that used to be named for an exhortation for Chiang Kai-shek to have a long life (I'm not making that up) and is now named after an aboriginal tribe. I'm just referring you to place names, I don't expect you to know anything.

Vorkosigan

andrewcriddle · 04-29-2012, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Josephus does sometimes expect background knowledge in his readers. He may have expected them to know that Christians followed Jesus Christ.

As an example of Josephus requiring background knowledge see this passage from Antiquities book 17.

This requires the reader to realise that the Caesar involved is Augustus and that Sebastus is a Greek translation of Augustus.

Andrew Criddle

Why?

"In Taipei there is a major street called Luosifu Road named after a famous American president that runs into what used to be Jieshou Road, which was later renamed Ketegalen Road."

There, I've just told you that Roosevelt Road intersects a road that used to be named for an exhortation for Chiang Kai-shek to have a long life (I'm not making that up) and is now named after an aboriginal tribe. I'm just referring you to place names, I don't expect you to know anything.

Vorkosigan

You are either expecting me to know that Luosifu = Roosevelt or you don't think it matters whether I realise this or not.

Similarly Josephus is either expecting the reader to know that Caesar here is Augustus = Sebastus or doesn't think it matters whether the reader realises this or not.

This seems a reasonable parallel to the claim that Josephus either expected the reader to know that Christians follow Jesus Christ or didn't think it mattered whether or not the reader realised this.

Andrew Criddle

noble savage · 04-29-2012, 06:53 AM

Andrew,

In either case, this would undermine Meier's claim that the reference to Jesus who is called the Messiah in Ant. 20.9.1 wold have made no sense to Josephus' audience unless Josephus had previously introduced Jesus and explained something about him, wouldn't it? Either Josephus presumes his audience knows Jesus is called Christ or he doesn't care.

NS

andrewcriddle · 04-29-2012, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by noble savage

Andrew,

In either case, this would undermine Meier's claim that the reference to Jesus who is called the Messiah in Ant. 20.9.1 wold have made no sense to Josephus' audience unless Josephus had previously introduced Jesus and explained something about him, wouldn't it? Either Josephus presumes his audience knows Jesus is called Christ or he doesn't care.

NS

I'm not sure how firmly Meier claims this. But I agree with you that the passage in 20:9 probably makes sense on its own even if there was no previous reference in Josephus to Jesus.

Andrew Criddle

Shafeesthoughts · 04-29-2012, 07:19 AM

Hi. First post. Wasnt there a time when Christians were called Nasarene?

hjalti · 04-29-2012, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shafeesthoughts

Hi. First post. Wasnt there a time when Christians were called Nasarene?

Hi there! This is Acts 24:5

Quote:

For we have found this man [Paul] a real pest and a fellow who stirs up dissension among all the Jews throughout [a]the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.

The bible says it. I believe it. That settles it! :P

Solo · 04-29-2012, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Here is the version of Josephus that is considered to be a pared-down 'authentic version'

'At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. He was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. When Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.'

Who were the Christians named after again?

They were called Christians because they were named after Jesus?

How did Biblical scholars come up with the idea that this was an authentic version?

Yea, good catch, Steven ! A 'tribe of Christians' of would have been bafflegab to Josephus. The Jews used 'notzrim' foir the Jesus-confessing messianists.
Goes into my notes......

Best,
Jiri

Shafeesthoughts · 04-29-2012, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Here is the version of Josephus that is considered to be a pared-down 'authentic version'

'At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. He was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. When Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.'

Who were the Christians named after again?

They were called Christians because they were named after Jesus?

How did Biblical scholars come up with the idea that this was an authentic version?

Actually it makes complete sense when you factor in language.

Isn't Christ a Greek word and the translation of Masih (messiah= anointed or respected) in Aramaic?

And so at the beginning of the quote Josephus indicates the primary characteristic of a holy man or teacher, and therefore explains that the people who followed that man were Christians.

Christians as a word is therefore a Greek word for those people.

What were these people called in the original Aramaic tongue?

Remember that Cyrus the great was also entitled Christ by the then Children of Israel because of his repatriation of them back to Judea, and then permitting them to rebuild the temple.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-29-2012, 06:53 AM	#25
noble savage Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: USA Posts: 21	Andrew, In either case, this would undermine Meier's claim that the reference to Jesus who is called the Messiah in Ant. 20.9.1 wold have made no sense to Josephus' audience unless Josephus had previously introduced Jesus and explained something about him, wouldn't it? Either Josephus presumes his audience knows Jesus is called Christ or he doesn't care. NS

04-29-2012, 07:19 AM	#27
Shafeesthoughts Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: London Posts: 379	Hi. First post. Wasnt there a time when Christians were called Nasarene?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.