aa5874

mary helena can you please start a new thread about "Slavonic Josephus" since it has nothing to do with Pliny's letter to Trajan about Christians.

la70119

icardfacepalm:

I'm not saying we should dump it completely, I'm saying we should put it into its proper place: AFTER Pliny but BEFORE the development of the canonical GOSPEL STORIES. How EARLY CHRISTIAN TRADITION got into an edition of Josephus and NOT THE OTHERS.

And if we treat Slavonic Josephus as it SHOULD be, MaryHelena: we STILL have ZERO evidence of Christianity before Pliny.

If you want to continue discussing this, start a Slavonic Josephus thread.

Minimalist

It's still an argument from silence, AA. Oddly though, I do sort of agree with the idea that a Roman aristocrat would have been amused enough by the story of a dead Jewish carpenter coming back from the dead after being crucified by a Roman magistrate that he would have mentioned it to his boss. I imagine they would have both gotten a laugh out of it.

But as you say, he didn't mention it.

aa5874

I really don't know if you are pretending or not but if you were charged with a crime that you did NOT commit then you may understand the significance of ABSENCE of EVIDENCE.

Once you did NOT commit a crime then your ONLY DEFENSE may be argument from SILENCE.

Religion was NOT a Joke in antiquity--Pliny EXECUTED Christians in his Letter to Trajan.

Pliny himself most likely Sacrificed to the Emperor of Rome--the Emperor himself may have considered himself a God.

You should understand that the very Roman Emperor and most likely Pliny, worshiped Myth Gods.,

Based on the Pliny letter if you don't worship and Sacrifice to the Emperor you may be EXECUTED.

I can ONLY argue that Pliny did NOT know of Jesus when he did NOT mention him. If Pliny mentioned Jesus then my argument could NOT have been sustained.

Just like if your DNA is NOT at the crime scene then it is extremely difficult maintain that you were there when there is NO other evidence.

If there was NO character known to Pliny as Jesus and he did NOT know what Christians believed then the Letter is compatible with what would be expected with such a scenario.

Minimalist

But Pliny committed no crime so your analogy fails and you are not striving to make a case "beyond a shadow of a doubt" anyway. His letter is a report to his boss. All we know is what he did say and making assumptions about what he did not say isn't going to get you far. I think if the jesus story had been sufficiently fleshed out at the time so that they were maintaining that a criminal executed by a Roman magistrate had come back to life and ascended to heaven that this might have been worth mentioning to Trajan. Erudite Roman aristocrats should have found the tale amusing.

But, as you say, there is nothing in there remotely like that. In fact, what Pliny does say of them is something which xtians are not quick to hold up as evidence for their cult. "They cursed Christ" while sacrificing to Trajan? That sure as shit is not part of the propaganda which xtians put out for their gruesome martyr stories, is it?

In any case, Pliny makes it quite clear that the reason he arrested these "xtians" was not because they were xtians but because they were holding secret meetings which violated some imperial edict. The Romans were more concerned with sedition than religion. In fact, as far as religion goes they were quite tolerant.

aa5874

How can it be assumed that the Pliny letter does NOT say anything about Jesus when we have the letter BEFORE US and it does NOT mention Jesus?

Now, I don't what to hear your Speculations of "IF this" and "IF that".

You accuse me of making assumptions and them IMMEDIATELY begin to Speculate.

All we know is the the Pliny letter did NOT mention Jesus and that Pliny EXECUTED Christians and did NOT even what they Believed up to the time they were already dead and Tortured two Deaconesses to find out the Truth.

The Tortured Deaconesses did say anything about Jesus in the Letter.

You won't get me to ASSUME Christ means Jesus.

I don't make ASSUMPTIONS.

I really don't know what Letter to Trajan you read or if you are simply making ASSUMPTIONS.

Does your letter have the part where Pliny ordered some of the Christians to be EXECUTED simply because they maintained they were Christians AFTER THREE interrogations when he did NOT even know what they believed?

I really don't know what you mean by "as far as religion goes they were quite tolerant".


Pliny Letter to Trajan So, Pliny did NOT tolerate people who called themselves Christians redardless of what they believe. Pliny didn't care about belief, he did NOT tolerate Christians.

Pliny will Kill Christians after three interrogations. 1-2-3 and you are a dead Christian under Pliny.