the_cave

IMO the work done by both Carlson and Mr. Smith himself establishes that whomever wrote the passage, it was taken from a reading of a version of Josephus that contained the TF (note how carefully I am stating this). The proximity of the procurator/prefect error and the datum concerning Pilate's responsibility for the crucifixion is too close in both texts to be coincidental. IMO, that is.

I have no position on whether it is best called an interpolation or a forgery, if Tacitus did not write it himself.

Ben C Smith

I agree that is a careful statement.

To be fair, Ken Olson has questioned the relationship between the TF and the passage in Tacitus. He has pointed out some other passages (one from Justin, another from Eusebius) that seem to contain significant parallels, too. His purpose is to make the parallels seem more natural than a comparison of just the three main passages (Luke, Tacitus, Josephus) would look. I am still absorbing the effects of these new parallels; the jury is still out for me.

Ben.

jules?

I see no evidence that Tacitus was referring to a historical JC.

If the quote is entirely original it simply points out that Jews in Rome were convinced the ungodly were going to die in a horrendous End Time featuring the burning of the city and that they were inspired by Christ, aka the messiah. No mention of JC or Yeshoo ben Joseph or even a descendant of David. No mention of any apostle or resurrection or Passion.

Likewise Josephus mentions plenty of wannabe messiahs, such as the Egyptian and even Jesus the peace maker and a brother; James of another wannabe messiah. Strangely the survival of death, and most met an end, by one of them is not mentioned but the rescue of his friends from the cross is.

There is no dispute even among critics that a Christ was expected as well as an imminent End Time when Israel would be restored and reign supreme as a world power.

No Robots

Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate.

Sheshonq

Which paradoxically works against authenticity, since Pilate was a prefect, not a procurator.

No Robots

What was Paul Bremer's title?

• Director of the Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance
• Director of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance
• Governor of Iraq
• U.S. Administrator of Iraq
• Proconsul
• Civilian Administrator of Iraq
• Provisional Governing Officer
• Head of the Coalition Provisional Authority

Pilate's situation, while not as convoluted as Bremer's, could still plausibly cause even the most conscientious historian to make a mistake.

Amaleq13

I'm not following you. What would the motivation be for a non-Christian to interpolate this passage?

aa5874

There is nothing in the passage that confirms that Christus was Jesus of the NT. It may be that the passage from Tacitus was used in fabricating the Jesus of the NT.

1. The way Chrisus died is unknown.
2. The age of Christus is not known.
3. The day Christus died is also unknown.
4. The actual place where Christus died is not stated.

There is just not enough information about Christus to claim he was the Jesus of the NT.

the_cave

That's a great question. Could it have just been an anti-Neronean? (It could also have been a Jewish, anti-Christian scribe, I suppose, but I find this less likely--would a Jewish writer have had a score to settle with Nero?)

Amaleq13

I think "Jewish, anti-Christian scribe" has more traction than "anti-Neronean" since, as the Christians are described (ie "mischievous superstition", "evil"), his persecution seems entirely legitimate.

I would also think that a Christian interpolator would have to be seen as quite the devious chap. Certainly more clever than the one who is thought to have interpolated Josephus.