stephan huller

if these arguments werent contained in a written document how was the information from celsus's jew conveyed - a sock puppet?

stephan huller

I am not the first person to suggest or suppose the Celsus was "handling a written document" - J Harris http://books.google.com/books?id=1M4...cument&f=false

stephan huller

Philip Carrington:

It is a viable opinion. The only reason why many others haven't seen this before is their unfamiliarity with Jewish anti-polemical works to which the writings of the 'Jew of Celsus' conforms:

stephan huller

This has actually been a useful exercise. I just took for granted that Celsus was citing a text. Now I am finding support for a position I did not consider to be controversial in the first place. Thanks

stephan huller

Another scholar who is open to the idea that it is an actual written text:

http://books.google.com/books?id=3TE...cument&f=false

stephan huller

Schneelmelcher is non-committal:

attested by the pagan anti-Christian author Celsus (about 178) and probably deriving from Jewish polemic

stephan huller

Harlow - Some of the arguments made by the unnamed Jewish informant in books 1 and 2 of Origen's Contra Celsum reflect Jewish polemics of the first and second century ce: Jesus' Jewish pedigree is suspect; the story of his virgin birth was fabricated; and his father was a Roman soldier named Celsus's now lost work, On the True Doctrine, was written ca. 177-180 CE; and the Jewish traditions on which it drew go back earlier still.

http://books.google.com/books?id=SQy...nthera&f=false

stephan huller

Borg and Crossan:

Celsus, and his anti-Christian Jewish source, had read Matthew— specifically Matthew—because he speaks of Mary's husband

http://books.google.com/books?id=vnB...nthera&f=false

stephan huller

Arthur Williams "The first assertion which Celsus quotes from his Jew is that Jesus invented the .."

http://books.google.com/books?id=6m4...page&q&f=false

DCHindley

But isn't Harris suggesting that Celsus was writing in reaction to the Apology of Aristides, and that "if Celsus is handling any written document ... The agreement ... with [the Apology of] Aristides is certainly striking"? Does anyone really think that the Apology of Aristides is the source for the charges against Jesus and his followers by the Jew in Celsus' book? I think it is Celsus' own addition, inspired perhaps from a written source or perhaps not. Celsus may not have a high opinion of Jews, but that doesn't mean he has not spoken with Jews about Jesus and learned something of their polemic against Christian claims about him.

DCH