Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 10-13-2008, 10:25 AM

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

Edit: Will a moderator please change the title of this thread to "Non-Christian Testimony"?

Amaleq13 · 10-13-2008, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

Edit: Will a moderator please change the title of this thread to "Non-Christian Testimony"?

Done.

Ben C Smith · 10-13-2008, 12:13 PM

Are the bolder claims on that page backed up anywhere else on the site with actual evidence?

Ben.

Toto · 10-13-2008, 12:24 PM

Which are the bolder claims, and which are more timid?

Ben C Smith · 10-13-2008, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Which are the bolder claims, and which are more timid?

Examples of bold claims (boldfacing added):

Dennis had to fudge the period between December 25th (Mithras' birthday, inherited by JC a century earlier) and January 1st, the beginning of the Roman year. [Comment from the lefthand margin.]

Quite simply, the reference is a Christian forgery, added to Suetonius to backup the work of the 5th century forger Sulpicius Severus, who heavily doctored the work of another Roman historian – Tacitus – with a lurid tale of brutal persecution ('torched Christian martyrs') which immortalized Nero as the first Antichrist in the eyes of the Christian church.

There was no 'tribe of Christians' during Josephus's time. Christianity did not get off the ground until the second century.

Ben.

Toto · 10-13-2008, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Which are the bolder claims, and which are more timid?

Examples of bold claims (boldfacing added):

Dennis had to fudge the period between December 25th (Mithras' birthday, inherited by JC a century earlier) and January 1st, the beginning of the Roman year. [Comment from the lefthand margin.]

OK - this idea of Mithras' birthday being Dec 25 is commonly believed, but probably not supportable.

Quote:

Quite simply, the reference is a Christian forgery, added to Suetonius to backup the work of the 5th century forger Sulpicius Severus, who heavily doctored the work of another Roman historian – Tacitus – with a lurid tale of brutal persecution ('torched Christian martyrs') which immortalized Nero as the first Antichrist in the eyes of the Christian church.

An interesting theory that we have discussed before.

Quote:

There was no 'tribe of Christians' during Josephus's time. Christianity did not get off the ground until the second century.

Possibly true. There is no real evidence of a Christian movement until the very end of the first century, Even many historicists think that Christians would have been viewed as a sect of Judaism for most of the first century. And there is no evidence that Christians were viewed as a "tribe" at that time, while Eusebius does refer to Christians as a "tribe."

Ben C Smith · 10-13-2008, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

OK - this idea of Mithras' birthday being Dec 25 is commonly believed, but probably not supportable.

....

An interesting theory that we have discussed before.

....

Possibly true. There is no real evidence of a Christian movement until the very end of the first century, Even many historicists think that Christians would have been viewed as a sect of Judaism for most of the first century. And there is no evidence that Christians were viewed as a "tribe" at that time, while Eusebius does refer to Christians as a "tribe."

Thanks for your brief evaluation of these statements; but recall, my question was whether the website itself supported these statements somewhere.

Ben.

Toto · 10-13-2008, 07:12 PM

The website lists sources. It's not clear if those sources support those points; but one could check, or email the author. You seem to have found a few that do not have specific footnotes. But I am not sure why they are especially "bold."

Ben C Smith · 10-13-2008, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But I am not sure why they are especially "bold."

Because, if unsupported, they are irresponsible assertions. Here they are again:

Dennis had to fudge the period between December 25th (Mithras' birthday, inherited by JC a century earlier) and January 1st, the beginning of the Roman year. [Comment from the lefthand margin.]

Quite simply, the reference is a Christian forgery, added to Suetonius to backup the work of the 5th century forger Sulpicius Severus, who heavily doctored the work of another Roman historian – Tacitus – with a lurid tale of brutal persecution ('torched Christian martyrs') which immortalized Nero as the first Antichrist in the eyes of the Christian church.

There was no 'tribe of Christians' during Josephus's time. Christianity did not get off the ground until the second century.

Where is the nuance? Where is the expression of possibility or contingency? Rather, these are presented as if they were established facts.

I want to see whether they have in fact been sufficiently established to merit this air of certainty. All critical thinkers will, no doubt, want to see the same. Are you with me?

Ben.

Toto · 10-14-2008, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But I am not sure why they are especially "bold."

Because, if unsupported, they are irresponsible assertions. ....

Where is the nuance? Where is the expression of possibility or contingency? Rather, these are presented as if they were established facts.

I want to see whether they have in fact been sufficiently established to merit this air of certainty. All critical thinkers will, no doubt, want to see the same. Are you with me?

Ben.

I guess I don't understand the level of your outrage. If these allegations are wrong, that reflects badly on Kenneth Humphreys. If they are insufficiently nuanced, that might also reflect badly on him. You are free to point out where he is wrong, or just point to the obviously polemical nature of the site and ignore it.

But it was probably a mistake to allow a thread like this with only a link as the opening post.

10-13-2008, 10:25 AM	#1
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Non-Christian Testimony http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html Edit: Will a moderator please change the title of this thread to "Non-Christian Testimony"?

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

10-13-2008, 12:13 PM	#3
Ben C Smith Veteran Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Midwest Posts: 4,787	Are the bolder claims on that page backed up anywhere else on the site with actual evidence? Ben.

10-13-2008, 12:24 PM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Which are the bolder claims, and which are more timid?

10-13-2008, 07:12 PM	#8
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The website lists sources. It's not clear if those sources support those points; but one could check, or email the author. You seem to have found a few that do not have specific footnotes. But I am not sure why they are especially "bold."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.