Toto

A pertinent point from the interview on Debunking Christianity:

The Demise of Authenticity is the subject of this thread

aa5874

So why is Ehrman the poster-boy for the Historical Jesus using KNOWN defective criteria?

This writer is EXPOSING a little "dirty secret". There is a consensus WITHIN Scholarship that their methodology is worthless.

The continued quest for the historical Jesus is IRRATIONAL.

maryhelena

One of the editors of the above mentioned book, Anthony Le Donne, has written his own book on the historicity of the gospel JC.

Historical Jesus: What Can We Know and How Can We Know It? Anthony Le Donne (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Probably working on the premise that there is 'no smoke without a fire' - i.e. we have the gospel JC story, a story that would not be able to run very far without people being able to 'see' some historical reflection within it. The JC story bringing back memories of times past.....

mountainman

Care to expand this a little?

maryhelena

Pete - simple really! Just put history, established history re the Hasmonean and Herodian coins, and any history one can find in Josephus, in a column. Put this in chronological order and put the developing JC storyboard in additional columns. And the result is? History can be shown to be reflected within the JC story, ie the gospel JC story is history mythologized. And is that not what a lot of the OT is about? Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Moses and Joshua and that escape from Egypt. Origin stories that seek to reflect a people's perception of their history. Likewise, the gospel JC story is a reflection, a symbolizing, a mythologizing, upon the historical events that lead to the new spiritual comprehension that is known today as Christianity. To imagine that all of this is centered upon one figure, presumed to be the historical gospel JC - it boggles the mind! History has a far wider focus and while individuals are of course important, they do not shine alone. They are players in a team sport.....

History via Josephus	Slavonic Josephus	John	Mark	Matthew	Luke
40 b.c. Antigonus, the last King and High Priest of the Jews. The Man of War.		JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.	JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.	THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS.	THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
Bites ear of his uncle Hyrcanus. Thus denying him the High Priest office.		One of the high priest’s servants, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off.	cutting off his ear.	cutting off his ear.	cutting off his right ear.
3 year rule		3 Passover visits to Jerusalem.
A great deal of money given to Marc Antony by Herod the Great to have Antigonus killed.	The teachers of the Law were [therefore] envenomed with envy and gave thirty talents to Pilate, in order that he should put him to death. And he, after he had taken [the money], gave them consent that they should themselves carry out their purpose.	Judas: He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.	"Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them. They were delighted to hear this and promised to give him money.	30 pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders.	"And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus. They were delighted and agreed to give him money.
37 b.c. Cassius Dio: scourged on a stake/cross and slain; Josephus: beheaded by Marc Antony.	Crucified under Pilate: 19 -36 c.e.	Crucified under Pilate: 19 -36 c.e.	Crucified under Pilate: 19 -36 c.e.	Jesus flogged, and crucified, under Pilate: 19 -36 c.e	Crucified under Pilate: 19 -36 c.e.
Antigonus possibly born during later part of rule of his grandfather Alexander Jannaeus 107 – 76 b.c.		JC not yet 50 years old.
4 b.c. -34 c.e. Philip the Tetrarch of Trachonitis and Gaulanitis and of the nation of the Bataneans. The Man of Peace	But when they saw his power, that he accomplished everything that he would by word, they urged him that he should enter the city and cut down the Roman soldiers and Pilate and rule over us. But that one scorned it.				Powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. But we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel.
He had showed himself a person of moderation and quietness in the conduct of his life and government; he constantly lived in that country which was subject to him.	His works, that is to say, were godly, and he wrought wonder-deeds amazing and full of power. Now he opposed himself in much to the Law and did not observe the Sabbath according to ancestral custom. Yet, on the other hand, he did nothing reprehensible nor any crime; but by word solely he effected everything.	Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.	But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.	But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?”Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.	If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them.
He used to make his progress with a few chosen friends, his tribunal also, on which he sat in judgment, followed him in his progress, and when any one met him who wanted his assistance, he made no delay, but had his tribunal set down immediately, wheresoever he happened to be, and sat down upon it, and heard his complaint. He there ordered the guilty that were convicted to be punished, and absolved those that had been accused unjustly.	And many from the folk followed him and received his teachings. And he went to his accustomed place and wrought his accustomed works. And as again more folk gathered themselves together round him, then did he win glory through his works more than all. And there gathered themselves to him of servants (Knechten) a hundred and fifty, but of the folk a multitude.	After this, Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them, and baptized. Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve?	They were on their way up to Jerusalem, with Jesus leading the way, and the disciples were astonished, while those who followed were afraid. Again he took the Twelve aside and told them what was going to happen to him.	Jesus called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out impure spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.	When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles.
Rebuilt the city of Casearea Phillipi.			Jesus and his disciples went on to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked them, Who do people say I am?”They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets.”But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”Peter answered, “You are the Messiah.”Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.	When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.
And the village of Bethsaida.		Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida.
He died at Julias; (Bethsaida Julias) and when he was carried to that monument which he had already erected for himself beforehand, he was buried with great pomp.			Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus’ body. So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.	As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus. Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body, and Pilate ordered that it be given to him. Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away	Now there was a man named Joseph, a member of the Council, a good and upright man, who had not consented to their decision and action. He came from the Judean town of Arimathea, Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body. Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid
Married to Salome	Married to Herodias		Married to Herodias	Married to Herodias
Died in the 20th year of Tiberius in 34 c.e., after 37 year rule. Dating via Josephus.	Philip died before evening and his dominion was given to Agrippa.

For additional thoughts on Philip the Tetrarch - an old thread:


http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=289319

Is Agrippa II the son of Philip the Tetrarch ?

footnote:

Antiquities, published around 95 c.e. has Philip the Tetrarch married to Salome, the daughter of Herodias. This indicates that gMark and gMatthew were written prior to Antiquities. Josephus, for whatever agenda, has his own version of Herodian history here. A version that has been questioned by Nikos Kokkinos. Mentioned in an article by Ross S Kraemer:

"Implicating Herodias and Her Daughter in the Death of John the Baptizer: A (Christian) Theological Strategy? JBL Summer 2006".

tanya

Sorry I cannot agree with this formulation.

Coins: YES, for they are not likely to change over time. However, documents are another matter.

I will only believe that document xyz, ostensibly written by Josephus, is valid and legitimate, if it is excavated after a 1900 year rest in a tomb, somewhere. There are too many documented instances of overt forgery, concerning text attributed to Josephus, to regard same as reliable.

"Slavonic" Josephus is even more unreliable as manuscript evidence....

ok, I can accept the idea that your hypothesis may represent a useful point of discussion, but, to be genuinely fruitful, one requires a second tableau, summarizing the dates of authorship of our extant manuscripts, together with a revision history...I doubt that "Antiquities" sat in a lead vault somewhere, until last week, when it saw the light of day for the first time in 2k years.

Who copied "Antiquities"? What was his/her agenda?

Why couldn't Mark have copied "Antiquities", rather than Josephus copying Mark? How do we distinguish these two possibilities?

Based on the manuscript evidence, alone, why couldn't some third party have created both of them?

andrewcriddle

In the philosophy of history the relation of Bayes theorem to historical claims is an important issue which has been rather neglected.

One reason for neglect is the apparent belief of most practicising historians that the theorem doesn't in real life cases genuinely help to resolve controversies and clarify issues.

A main area where Bayes theorem can be helpful in correcting human intuitive tendency to misunderstand the real probabilities is where the positive evidence supports an intrinsically improbable conclusion.

E.G. There is a DNA match between blood found at the scene of a crime and a known individual. The probability that a random individual would match as well is one hundred thousand to one. However without the DNA evidence there would be no case whatever against the individual. Most people would feel that the DNA evidence firmly establishes the guilt of the individual, (or at least presence on the scene), but a Bayesian analysis would make one very cautious.

However for this to be particularly relevant to Richard Carrier's question he would have to emphasize the intrinsic (a-priori) improbability of hypothesis h. Carrier undoubtedly will have other arguments for his position, but these other arguments can probably be expressed just as well without all the Bayesian methodology.

IF Carrier is going to emphasize a personal belief in the intrinsic implausibility of the historicist position then I doubt if his work will cause many people to change their minds.

Hence I have doubts whether Richard Carrier's work will contain arguments against the historicist position which are both a/ best explained using Bayes theorem and b/ found widely convincing.

Andrew Criddle

maryhelena

Sure - question everyone and everything anyone wrote. I do it all the time....

It's not manuscript 'evidence' that I'm after - it's the storyline that is contained within the manuscript that is relevant. The gospel JC is not history - 'he' is a story...Dating manuscripts only places the document within a certain time frame - it does nothing for the origin of the story the document contains.

Everything and anything is possible with manuscript 'evidence' - that's why I endeavour to trace storyline developments.....

aa5874

You seem to have NO clue about Bayesian analysis. Your post is like a flat-earther trying to analyze the motion and trajectory of the Sun around the earth.

andrewcriddle

I am not an expert in Bayesian analysis.

Could you please explain in more detail what you think is wrong with my post ?

Andrew Criddle