aa5874

But, the claim that the Essenes were invented by Josephus cannot be proven or shown to be credible at this moment since there is extant information from other sources that mention the Essenes during the time of the writers themselves and where their geographic location was identified.

The TF on the other hand is a very good example of an invention. No other well-known writer before Eusebius mentioned Jesus Christ and that he was raised fom the dead after three days.

Casper

Depends on what you know about the back yard...

kcdad

Depends upon what you ALREADY know... that is correct.

Casper

Or what you later find out.

If you find a bunch more pots, well...

andrewcriddle

The saying attributed to Rabbi Akiva (Mishnah Sanhedrin chapter 10:1 refers to He who reads in heretical books (Neusner's translation) It is not clear exactly what books are meant, later Talmudic discussion gives various suggestions the books of the atheists and Ben Sira/Ecclesiasticus but these may be later guesses.

Andrew Criddle

bacht

Were the proscribed books apocalyptic?

The Talmud reproachingly calls these men, who frequently brought disappointment and woe upon the people, "mahshebe ḳeẓim" (calculators of the [Messianic] ends: Sanh. 97b; comp. 92b, 99a; Ket. 111a; Shab. 138b; 'Eduy. ii. 9-10; for the expression , see Dan. xii. 4, 13; Assumptio Mosis, i. 18, xii. 4; II Esd. iii. 14; Syriac Apoc. Baruch, xxvii. 15; Matt. xiii. 39, xxiv. 3).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/vi...to%20come#1223

kcdad

The later pots are dependent upon the earlier pot... not vice versa.

There is no later pot to base your evaluation of the earlier pot... try again.

mountainman

I am additionally suspicious of the fact that the other sources
in this "Essenes Affair" -- Philo and Pliny -- were along with the
scrolls, and soon to become codices of Josephus, and a host of
other literature, preserved by Eusebius and his continuators.

Examine the manuscript tradition for each of these writers.
Our earliest manuscripts appear to have all descended from
the doors of Eusebius' scriptoria. We may not in fact have
multiple authors' assertions regarding this "Essenes Affair"
but in fact be looking down the barrel of a single editor
whom we today call "Eusebius".

Eusebius charms his audience with his collage of stories
about a singular political and religious "nation of the
essenes" - aka "the nation of proto-christians".

How convenient.
IMO its suspicious.






The TF is a very good example of Eusebian fraud.
Even those who argue that the TF is a "partial interpolation"
must understand that a "partial forgery" is still regarded
as forgery. Constantine demonstrates a parallel disregard
for authenticity and standards of "proof" in his extant
"Oration" delivered at Antioch. See Lord Acton on "gangsters".

aa5874

Well, why did not Eusebius just simply replace the word "Essenes" with the word "christian"?

It does make sense to me for Eusebius to invent Essenes in Josephus, Philo and Pliny, then claim that Essenes are christians in his own Church History.

Why would Eusebius use possibly over 4000 words on Essenes and only 125 words on Jesus Christ in the TF?

I don't think Eusebius had any time to invent the Essenes, or else he would have just simply removed the word Essenes and replaced it with christian.

These are some of the people or writings Eusebius may have invented with the collusion of the Church, Ignatius, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Polycarp. Papias, Hegesippus, Acts of Apostles and Paul.

andrewcriddle

I don't know. My point is that the passage doesn't make clear exactly what is wrong with the books or which books they are.

My suspicion, from the context, is that it is referring to books which deny the resurrection, but that is just a guess.

Andrew Criddle