Duvduv

So how are claims of biased church texts (not even in original manuscripts) in the exclusive possession of monasteries or the Vatican considered "evidence" of anything?

Duvduv

As a matter of fact the rabbinical traditions says that the "Nero" who converted was not the emperor but someone else, possibly a general, with the same name.
But again, we are treading on the territory of faith in someone or something else, which secularists often dress up as "evidence," and which should be recognized as faith, just as one may have faith in the rabbinical sources.

Of course in the case of the emergence of Christianity it all takes a different direction since the foundation of the texts, claims and dogmas are meant to fulfill or complete Judaism, its scriptures, etc. So it pays to at least see whether they meet the test or not.

Jeffrey Gibson

Assuming that the MSS of Tacitus and Suetonius are both "church texts" and are only in the exclusive possession of monasteries and the Vatican must we also assume, as you do, that they have been corrupted while there? And aren't they the same evidence we have for Plato and Aristotle and Plutarch, Euclid, Aeschylus, Dio Cassius, Livy, and many many others?

In any case, where are the original MSS for the Mishnah and the Talmud?

And how are the claims within our transmitted MSS of them that have been in the possession of agenda driven Yeshivas (Hasidim vs Karaites, Mitnagdim, Shabbeteans, Askenazim vs Sephardim) evidence, let alone reliable evidence, of anything?

Jeffrey

Bernard Muller

to Duvduv,
When these texts (church texts or works by Tacitus, Suetonius & Pliny the Younger) were found, what is your evidence that, at this time, there was an urgency to prove Christians existed in the 1st century?
Were they, at this time, people (Heretics, Jews, Muslims, etc.) claiming Christianity did not start in the 1st century? And the Catholic church wanted to prove them wrong?

Cordially, Bernard

Duvduv

The agenda was succession after the perceived failure of the Jews in the first century. The agenda existed under a regime with power, with the motive, means and opportunity to create a new religion for the entire empire.
That did not exist in the first century. Only the themes existed from the first century.

Duvduv

The fact that the hand their exclusive hands on all this material for so long means that they had the ability to design their agenda for the power of their regime.
The case of Jews is completely different since no political regime existed for the Jewish People who lived in places as disparate as Morocco and Persia.
Yeshivas per se only came into existence in the latter part of the 19th century. But there was never a central hierarchical system among the Jewish people. Yet the overall uniform practice and teaching existed everywhere. Even prior to movable print and books.

aa5874

Please, you seem not to realise that the fragments of Papias are in a far worse condition that the Pauline letters.

1. There are no recovered dated manuscripts of Papias.

2. The Apologetic sources that mention Papias are highly questionable.

3. The claims made in "Church History" and "Against Heresies" about the Gospels have been Rejected virtually universally by Scholars.

4. In Church History and "Against Heresies" Papias appears to be a fiction writer.

5. In Church History and Against Heresies it is not even claimed that Papias was aware of the Pauline letters.

See http://www.hypotyposeis.org/synoptic...ce-papias.html

The fragments of Papias found in Apologetic writings do not help to date Paul before c 62 CE.

outhouse

Do you have any examples of this conspiracy?

Were these ancient authors so good, and hid their tracks so well, you cannot provide evidence of such?

OR is it that we see dating methods being accurate enough that no changes are warranted.


Then you need to explain why Romans would create a movement in the beginning sharply opposed to the Empire, if they were going to conspire in hidden places.

outhouse

It matches up with a mid first century Hellenistic Proselytes to a T.


I think the Sadducees, and Essenes use of Judaism was much more perverted.

Duvduv

What conspiracy? Just because a government or regime establishes a policy to develop a new religion, does that mean it's a conspiracy with its negative implications?

Anyway, they didn't hide their tracks so well. That's exactly what we point out when we discuss the contextual problems and contradictions and internal errors in the texts, and single source texts from "unbiased" sources a few hundred years ago such as the priest Giovanni Giocondo and his discovery of the Pliny document. Or the single source copy of the Justin texts from the same time period.

But IF there are more specific details of their work it might be contained in those areas of the Vatican library that are off limits to the public.

And when the Maoists, N. Koreans or Stalinists produced their personality cults did it involve a far-fetched conspiracy or a policy and its implementation and development?