gnosis92

First, did they meet any Christ mythicists, and second, if they did, would they have reported this, as they evidentally met and reported the views of Christ-historicists.

If as it is alleged they got their information about Jesus solely from the New Testament, and not information independant of the New Testament, (thus ruling out their testimony as independant attestation to Jesus' historicity) How likely is it that they met Christians who were Christ-historicists, but 0 Christians who were Christ-mythicists (assuming that if they had, they would have reported their beliefs) if the original Christians for the first hundred years, from Paul and "James brother of the Lord" were all Christ-mythicists.

Toto

There is no indication that Josephus ever met any Christians of any stripe.

The Christians described by Pliny could have been mythicists as easily as historicists - Pliny does not describe their theology.

Roger Pearse

Considering that the historical record contains evidence to the contrary -- as you know --, would it not be better to say "there is no evidence that I am willing to accept that..."? As stated the above is not accurate.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto

There is no evidence that stands up to rigorous scrutiny that Josephus ever met any Christians. If you lower your standards a bit, you can claim that there is some evidence that Josephus knew something about Christians, and that what he knew fit in amazingly well with what Eusebius thought he should have reported.

Minimalist

Forgeries are not evidence.

Roger Pearse

It is important to get clear in our minds the difference between theory and data. Particularly a silly theory.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse

Better; this makes clearer the distinction between data and opinion.

Sorry if that sounds trivial, but even serious scholars get confused between the two, and all the bad scholarship that I have ever seen arises from a failure in this area.

Mind you, as far as I am aware Josephus never speaks about whether he met Christians, so the very emphatic manner in which you speak is a little odd (unless I'm missing something?). He knows of them, and he discusses their founder in two passages, one of which seems probably damaged somehow. It was no doubt possible in Rome in the time of Domitian to do both these things without meeting any.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Steven Avery

Thank you, Roger. Oh, don't ferget, Josephus knows quite a bit about John the Baptist as well.

And one can theorize that similarities in text between Josephus and Luke were due to a usage of Acts by Josephus. Or, a skeptic late dater would likely theorize in reverse. Or they could be independent sources involved.

However, as Roger points out, there is simply no data for the emphatic reverse assertion of Toto.
Toto is right if the point is that Josephus may have never met Christians.

Being concerned about data and opinion .. and probability...
One could say with greater confidence :

"There is no evidence that stands up to rigorous scrutiny that Josephus never met any Christians."

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Minimalist

Oh, please don't tell me that you think the TF is authentic?

quoting

^^^Mabey some, but def not all of it was a forgery