aa5874

You have only contradicted yourself. You seemed to have known in advance that the pastorals were most likely NOT independent of gMark and the other synoptics.

1. You agree that the 1 Timothy is later than gMark.

2. You date the Pastorals to the early 2nd century.

Once you maintain an early date for gMark then you have mis-represented your own opinion.

Tenorikuma

So 1 Timothy 6:13 is the only literary/historical evidence suggesting Mark didn't completely make up the story of Jesus dying under Pontius Pilate, and it only counts as evidence only if (1) the author, despite almost certainly writing later than Mark, didn't know of Mark, and (2) the reference to Pontius Pilate in 1 Tim 6:13 is not an interpolation.

Doherty thinks the author is unaware of the Gospels (as seems to be the case generally) and argues for an interpolation. (http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/sil20arg.htm)

Unfortunately, I don't have any critical commentaries of 1 Timothy on hand.

andrewcriddle

IF the reference to Pontius Pilate in the TF about Jesus in Josephus is authentic then it is probably independent of Mark. However the authenticity is very questionable.

IF the passage in Tacitus about Pontius Pilate is based on what Christians in Rome in the time of Nero were claiming then it is unlikely to be dependent on Mark. However it may just be based on Tacitus' knowledge of what Christians in the time of Trajan were claiming.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

Once you admit the authenticity is very questionable then it is of very little value.
In other words, you don't know what to make of the passage in Tacitus.

However, the short gMark contradicts the passage in Tacitus about Pontius Pilate.

In the short gMark, there was NO New Religion under the name of Christ during the time of Pilate up to the day it is claimed Jesus was crucified.

Jesus was called a Jewish prophet or John the Baptist.

Mark 8

Tenorikuma

Thanks for the remarks, Andrew.

1. I see no reason to take the Testimonium Flavianum seriously.

2. Tacitus' remark about the death of Chrestus at the hands of Pilate is a diversion from his comments about Nero, and he could have heard that story from Christians at any time up to the writing of the last book of Annals.

Rather, I think Tacitus' comment is good evidence that Mark was widely known, at least in Rome where it was probably written, by the 110s A.D., giving the Gospel of Mark an earlier terminus ad quem than the other gospels.

aa5874

You seem not aware that not even Apologetic sources knew of Tacitus Annals with Christus.

For hundreds of years after 115 CE, All Apologetic sources that used the writings of Tacitus NEVER mentioned Annals 15.44 with Christus.

When the History of the Church was composed NO mention of Christus in Tacitus was mentioned.

At the start of the 5th century, Sulpitius Severus mentioned a passage that is similar to Annals 15.44 but again did NOT mention any character called Christus.

Tacitus in Histories did claim Vespasian was the prophesied Messianic ruler found in Hebrew Scripture.

Apoologetic sources also claimed that up to the 3rd century the Jews did NOT acknowledge any person called Jesus Christ.

Tacitus Annals with Christus is a very late forgery and does NOT at all show that there were a Jesus cult of Christians.

Tacitus Annals 15.44 with Christus EXPOSES Fraud and forgery of ancient writings.

Tenorikuma

That's as may be, aa, but without learning Latin and devoting myself to study of Tacitus, I tend to think it's probably genuine, and that a Christian interpolater could have done a much better job of it – not calling Jesus "Chrestus", for example. Your objections are noted.

aa5874

Your position is highly illogical. A dumb forgery cannot make a passage authentic. You seem not to want to deal with the evidence from antiquity.

Are you not aware of Tacitus "Histories"??

According to Tacitus, Vespasian was the Predicted Messianic ruler found in Hebrew Scripture and that is Corroborated by Suetonius and Josephus.

Are you NOT aware of Suetonius "Life of Vespasian"

It is also claimed Vespasian performed Miracles by healing the Blind with Spit and healing the Lame with a Touch.

Are you NOT aware of the Synoptic Gospels??

Tacitus Annals 15.44 is NOT even compatible with the NT.

Jesus of the short gMark did NOT start any New Religion under the name of Christ.

Jesus was called John the Baptist, Elijah or one of the Prophets in the Synoptics Gospels--NOT Christus.

In gMark, there was another person using the name of Christ in the Public--Not Jesus.

Without learning Latin, there is an abundance of evidence that show that Annals 15.44 with Christus is a blatant fraud and forgery carried out sometime after the end of the 4th century.

Tenorikuma

Aa, I haven't implied any of the things you think you are correcting me on. Try to stay on the same page as the rest of us, please.

docyabut

luk 24: 50 And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.


Luk 24:51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.


I believe Jesus may have died around Lazarus and his sister Mary Magdalene`s house in Bethany , complications from the wounds after surviving the crucifixion,four or forty days.


John only claim they saw Jesus, while they were fishing.