aa5874

I mentioned more than attestation--sources that mentioned Josephus regarded him as credible.

Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio corroborated Events in Josephus.

Are you implying that Josephus was NOT Credible??

Tom Verenna

First, I'm not implying anything. I'm asking you to explain why you chose to use the word 'credible'; I honestly thought you mean something else (based on the context of your post, I thought when you meant 'credible' you meant something like 'Josephus as a historical figure who wrote things down is a credible claim'--something like that). But you seem to be suggesting that Josephus, overall, is credible--which I can only interpret to mean 'credible as a historian'. So which do you mean?

Second, whether or not Josephus' accounts are corroborated doesn't ipso facto mean Josephus was credible--because Tacitus and Cassius Dio aren't necessarily 'credible'. They get things wrong or make things up or exaggerate things just as much as Josephus. Josephus is credible about some things, but not other things. Real historians try not to oversimplify the evidence by generalizing.

In Antiquities, for example, Josephus tells a tale about how Alexander the Great marched on Jerusalem and one thing led to another and in the end, Josephus says, Alexander the Great worshiped at the Jewish Temple and granted the Jews honors and so on. But this never happened. The whole scenario was completely invented--probably by Josephus himself--and, in fact appears to imitate, and rely heavily upon, the Book of Judith (which in turn rests heavily on other earlier Old Testament motifs). So clearly Josephus is not above fabricating whole historical narratives, so he can't be considered 'credible' in the same sense that, say, Arrian is credible (and even he makes a lot of mistakes and invents things and lies on occasion to fit his ideology).

Third and finally, relax. None of these issues are going to be solved here, in this thread, on this forum. When I read your posts, all I see is polemic dripping with hyperbole. Even if you have some very salient ideas, they are masked by your tone which is carried on every bold-faced, red-hued, italicized word. Take some advice from someone who used to be just like you. Relax.

Roger Pearse

This is what we have the discipline of textual criticism for; to ensure that the texts we have are as good as they can be.

We find that, in practice, anyone who sets out on the time-consuming process of hand copying something DOES actually want a copy. In fact it makes the process much longer and much, much harder, if you decide that you want to make changes. The labour is so great that after a while you just slump back into rote copying.

Manuscripts were still being copied in the west 500 years ago. So we can get a very good idea of what happens by looking at copies made then, where we can trace the direct copies, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and see what happens (or doesn't).

In fact Syriac manuscripts were still being hand copied in the 20th century. So again we can do comparisons.

I don't know off-hand, but a look at the introduction to a critical edition should give some info on this. One key pointer is the absence of the later controversies and buzzwords, which dominate later literature.

Well, rather than asking the question and stopping -- after all, no-one owes any of us an education --, may I suggest that you then start in on what the answer might be? Have a think about possibilities, and research it a bit. Remember this is a subject on which scholars in universities all around the world have a set view. Unless we're nuts, it's reasonable to suppose that they aren't all in the pay of the Christians, Illuminati, the lizard-people or whatever. So it should be possible to find out for ourselves what it is that causes people to ignore this kind of hypothesis.

Are we talking about Julian the Apostate? Several of his works exist... (confused). It would be unwise to argue from what these do not mention, I agree.

Reading your letter, I have a bad feeling that you are engaged in destroying your own sense of what is and is not sensible and reasonable on this by concentrating on reading the sort of nonsense that gets posted here and in rubbish fora around the web. I don't say this as criticism, note; just trying to help. Hey, don't do this to yourself. It's hard enough to get a grip on subjects without starting with the Von Danikens and convincing ourselves, by constant immersion, that this is the Truth. Read sensible stuff and take a vow of abstinence on the headbangers.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

aa5874

Don't you understand what the word 'Credible' means?? I am astonished by your comments.

Credible simply means Believable.

The writings attributed to Josephus are Credible.

Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are NOT Credible.

In order to show that Josephus, Tacitus and Cassius Dio are NOT Credible you MUST rely on some Credible source.

You also know that there are so-called Historians that are NOT Credible. Ehrman is one of them that is NOT Credible.

Please PRESENT the Credible source of antiquity that shows Josephus personally made up stuff about Alexander the Great and did NOT use sources whether oral or written.

You MUST provide the Source for your claims about Josephus if you want me to consider you credible.

Too many persons here are making claims about Josephus for which they have No Credible Source to support them.

You must be joking.

When I SAY the Jesus story and cult originated in the 2nd century that is my resolution. If you have NOT resolved anything that is your own business.

No-one can contradict my resolution using any actual credible evidence from antiquity.

No Scholar, No bishop, No HJer, No Mjer can contradict my resolution.

How in the world can people who ADMIT their Sources are NOT historiccally reliable, filled with Discrepancies, Contradictions and events that most likely did NOT happen resolve anything in this thread or on this forum???

I don't use Admitted Discredited Sources and NT Myth Fables like the so-called historian Ehrman.

Why are you doing this??? You are NOT credible. You don't see any polemic at all because if you did you would have identified them.

You see something you have never seen before. You are seeing the END of the HJ argument.

The NT is a compilation of Myth Fables from the 2nd century and later. Jesus, the disciples and Paul had NO real existence in the 1st century and before c 70 ce.

First Apology

J-D

Where? Has it stopped? Where? I don't see it stopping.

Tom Verenna

Oh sorry, I thought I was talking to a rational human being. My mistake.

aa5874

You have confirmed what I wrote. You are witnessing something which you have NEVER seen before.

I can say without Fear of contradiction based on the abundance of evidence that The NT is a compilation of Myth Fables from the 2nd century and later. Jesus, the disciples and Paul had NO real existence in the 1st century and before c 70 ce.

No human being can contradict me with any credible evidence.

No human being can dare argue for an HJ in my thread because I will TOTALLY destroy their argument.

No human being can dare use the NT as a Credible source for an HJ in my thread because I will Expose their Error.

You have Witnessed the End of the HJ argument.

I no longer accept Admitted Discredited Sources filled with known lies, fiction and implausibilities as credible sources to support the HJ argument.

The NT is a Compilation of Myth Fables like those of the Greeks and Romans.

First Apology XXI

Tom Verenna

You have no idea who you are talking to, do you? Someone may need to fill aa in on the irony here.

Iskander

You are a beautiful dreamer
“Beautiful dreamer, out on the sea,
Mermaids are chanting the wild lorelei;
Over the streamlet vapors are borne,
Waiting to fade at the bright coming morn”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beautiful_Dreamer


Is it possible to reach the end of a rainbow? the wheels will keep going round and round.

“Lyrics to 'the wheels on the bus'
The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round.
The wipers on the bus go swish, swish, swish, swish, swish, swish, swish, swish, swish.
The people on the bus go chat, chat, chat, chat, chat, chat, chat, chat, chat.
The horn on the bus goes beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep.
The babies on the bus go waa, waa, waa, waa, waa, waa, waa, waa, waa.”
http://learnenglishkids.britishcounc...wheels-the-bus

Good effort, aa. I have learned what I knew not
Let's break for lunch, please

aa5874

Are you implying that you know who YOU are talking to??

No human being can contradict my argument, with any credible source of antiquity, that the NT is a Compilation of Myth Fables from the 2nd century and that Jesus, the disciples and Paul had NO real existence in the 1st century and before c 68 CE.

In my thread, NO human being can argue for an HJ using Admitted Discredited Sources filled with Lies, Fiction and Implausibilities.

HJ is FINISHED.