Amaleq13

The author, while claiming the scenario is consistent with Josephus completely ignores what he actually tells us about the increase of guards during Passover specifically to watch the Temple and prevent exactly what Jesus is depicted as doing. It simply is not plausible that he could have gotten away with it. If the Temple story is true, nothing else that follows is true. If nothing else that follows is true, why should we assume the Temple incident is the only true claim?

darstec

And remember he had to have gotten away with it twice, once at the beginning of his ministry and again at the end. Not only were there Roman Temple guards, most likely Jewish, it is doubtful any wealthy moneychanger/banker would be carrying large amounts of money without a number of their own personal guards.

Vorkosigan

Looks like Fish has cut bait.....

Ben C Smith

Is Meier really arguing for the invention of the names of Mary and kin in that paragraph? Or is he arguing that Jesus came from a Jewish family interested in their Jewish heritage?

Are you certain that son of Mary is absent from P45? I am not getting that from any apparatus available to me (UBS 4th edition, the Nestle-Aland version in SQE), and Metzger writes in his Textual Commentary at Mark 6.3:

Objection was very early felt to this description of Jesus as carpenter, and several witnesses (including P45) assimilate the text to Mt 13.55 and read, "Is not this the son of the carpenter, the son of Mary...?"

P45 cuts off right at this verse, then picks up later in chapter 6 (in verse 16). So, if of Mary is absent, it may well be due to the lacuna, not due to the actual wording of the text at this point. (Note that I have not seen P45; I am just clarifying the picture here.)

Ben.

Haran

Vork, did you get this from a specific source that you can name, or is it simply a mistake? P45 breaks off before Mary, so it cannot be definitely said that "Son of Mary" is not found there. In fact, it appears likely by the text and spacing that does exist in the papyrus that the phrase was there.

cognac

This was a quick and dirty internet search for fun.

The challenge seemed kind of fun, especially since I’m no expert. But it seemed if I could trip over a few ideas with a quick internet search, then it’s likely that experts are going to weigh in with considerably more. So I chose Socrates, who supposedly lived from 469-399 BC. (This qualifies for the before-the-printing-press stipulation. And I'm not sure if he actually lived or not.)

A few writers give “biographical� accounts of the philosopher. Since we’re playing fast and dirty with that term, I don’t see why the following sources can’t qualify.

“Biographical� accounts of Socrates written within 100 years of his death. (I assume they were written within a 100 years because the writers all seemed to have died in the century after Socrates died and I’m assuming they wrote the works before they died.)

Ok, the works: at least three (3) from Plato. One (1) from Aristophanes (a play). Three (3) from Xenophon. And a few notes from Aristotle. That’s seven (7) in all, not counting Aristotle, unless my elementary addition is wrong. I’m not sure why I threw in Aristotle anyway.

The point here is that even if Socrates was a real person, it’s up for grabs whether or not what these guys wrote about him actually happened -- whether the accounts are historical. They probably are not. In fact, when the trial of Socrates was supposedly taking place, Xenophon was off at war. Some think that in the later dialogues of Plato (whatever you want to say they are -- because dating is controversial too) that P simply uses S as a puppet for his own ideas. What an original concept.

Here are the details, as best I could find them.

Plato 427 BC – 347 BC

“The trial and death of Socrates, who was given poison hemlock to drink, are described with great dramatic power in the Apology, the Crito, and the Phaedo of Plato.�

http://www.bartleby.com/65/so/Socrates.html


Aristophanes 448 BC-380 BC

“The Clouds (Nephelai) is a comedy written by the Ancient Greek playwright Aristophanes lampooning the sophists and the intellectual trends of late fifth-century Athens. Although it took last place in the comic festival Aristophanes entered it in, it is one of his most famous works because it offers a highly unusual portrayal of Socrates.�

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clouds


Xenophon, 431-354 BC

“Like Plato and other Socratics, Xenophon felt the need to compose an Apology or defense of Socrates in response to the charges brought against him by his accusers. Like Plato he also composed a Symposium. The most important of the Socratic works of Xenophon is the Memorabilia, a collection of discussions between Socrates and (typically) young Athenian men which begins in much the same spirit as the Apology, that is in defense of the philosopher.�

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin...head%3D%239082


Aristotle 384-322 BC

Not really counted, but adds some detail: In Metaphysics, he discusses some brief biographical notes about Socrates

“Socrates, however, was busying himself about ethical matters and neglecting the world of nature as a whole but seeking the universal in these ethical matters, and fixed thought for the first time on definitions.�

http://philosophy.berkeley.edu/macfa...platosoc.shtml

meforevidence

Here are many: http://www.geocities.com/bkitc/Evide...spelsBible.doc

1. Papyrus Egerton 2 (located in the British Museum) see: http://www.kchanson.com/ANCDOCS/greek/egerton.html

2. The Acts of Pilate: Early first century Christians knew of “The Acts of Pilate� and it was quoted by Justin Martyr (The famous Philosopher and Apologist who lived between 100 A.D and 165 A.D.). Note: This may not be the alleged "Acts of Pilate" we read today, but never-the-less, there was a book called "The Acts of Pilate" quoted by Justin Martyr which definitely named Jesus.

3. Thallus (c. A.D. 52)

4. Letters of Paul (Acts) (Romans) (1st Corinthians) (2 Corinthains) (Galatians) (etc. )

5. Josephus ( not simply Greek version but a more neutrual Aramaic Version)

6. The Talmud

7. Cornelius Tacitus: (A.D. 64-116)

8. Pliny the Younger (A.D. 112)

9. Clement (Ante-Niacean father) One such is the defense of the true Gospel of Mark (also early first century) against the "Secret Gospel of Mark which had a few additions as well as claimed additions which were not actually put in the book. There has never been any evidence otherwise.

10. The Roman Emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138)

11. Suetonius (A.D 120)

Some close to the first century:

Phlegon (A.D. 140)

Origen: (A.D. 184-254)

Lucian of Samosata (A.D. 170)

The Disciple / Apostle Peter

James, other writers other than the gospels.

The Magdala Papyri
Until recently, the earliest ancient New Testament text we had was “The Papyrus Rylands Greek 457, a fragment of John’s Gospel, which dates back to the first half of the second century. Then in 1994, another ancient fragment was found which dated earlier than 66 A.D. It is what is called the “Jesus Papyri� and more commonly called the “Magdelen Papyri�. Each ancient document found is assigned an identification number. It is 17P64. It is a segment of the Greek text of Matthew’s Gospel, Matthew 26:23 and 31. After being tested and dated with other ancient documents of the same period of time, it was determined that it actually could be part of the original text written or an immediate copy. Incidentally, the Mathew segment corresponds to Textus Receptus, the traditional source documents.

The Syriac Diatesseron 250 A.D. Even if the current one we have today may have been tampered with throughout the ages, the fact remains that Tatianus compiled the four gospels together (which must have existed before he did this) and created the Diatesseron. This was read throughout the churches but the mainstream church did not recognize it to be as authoritative as the already written four gospels.

Philadelphia Lawyer

That was me. The sources for Prester John are the various versions of the "letter" that he supposedly sent, as one Christian king to another, to the Byzantine emperor. The first version of the letter apparently turned up in Europe in 1165 CE. Within a short period of time, there were numerous versions of the letter, growing more and more elaborate and written in almost every European language, floating around. The letter is not really a biography (it's really more a first-person description of PJ's kingdom), but then, as numerous posters have pointed out, the Gospels are not really biographies either, in the strict definition of the term. By the way, my information on PJ comes from Robert Silverberg's book, "The Realm of Prester John".

Vorkosigan

No, there's an earlier reference for PJ, Otto of Freising, from 1145.

Philadelphia Lawyer

Right, Silverburg mentions this too. But he says that the first version of the letter purporting to be written by Prester John probably can be dated to 1165.