Roger Pearse

May we see the quotations in which they do so? Particularly since Justus is a lost work?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

windsofchange

I don't really think it's necessary to believe Jesus was fictitious in order to believe that the religion based on his teachings is untrue.

Roger Pearse

The TF did indeed migrate into one family of the manuscripts of the Jewish Wars. No doubt it did so by first being written in the margin, as a comment, and then being mistaken by a subsequent scribe for a portion of the text inadvertantly omitted and so written in the margin.

You probably should know that Robert Taylor was a renegade 18th century Anglican clergyman who managed to be imprisoned for fraud, convicted of deceiving a woman that he intended matrimony, and a general godbotherer who used to attempt to break up church services. His book is described in the Dictionary of National Biography as 'second hand learning', and the bits I've seen contain errors that showed he did not look at stuff he quotes.

The source that tells us about Justus, i.e. Photius, tells us also that (a) it's very short (b) it's silent about Christian things like all Jewish writings (c) it's very unreliable.

Shouldn't we first look for some evidence that Taylor's assertion has some merit? One sees online many, many people who behave as if whatever they choose to assert must be accepted as true unless anyone can convince them otherwise, and then use any means to ignore whatever proof to the contrary is produced. It's rather a silly game, and silly people do it; but we don't want to join them!

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Mythra

It was meant to be facetious, Roger.

Their silence told me that the Jesus story is fictional.

Sheesh. You scholars.

Mythra

Furthermore, Justus was the author of Ξρονικόν Ιουδαίων Βασιλέων τῶν ἐν τοῖς Στέμμασιν, a chronicle of the Jewish people from Moses to the death of Agrippa II. Photius ("Bibl." Cod. 33) describes it as being written in a very curtailed form. Use was probably made of this work by Sextus Julius Africanus, from whom Eusebius in his chronicle and the Byzantine historian Syncellus draw material. Certain notes in later historians which are not to be found in Josephus probably came from the chronicle of Justus through the excerpts of Africanus (e.g., Syncellus, ed. Dindorf, i. 588). It has been supposed that the account of the heathen-Philistine origin of the Herodian house, related by Africanus, came originally from Justus ("R. E. J." xlv. 45).

If "Justus" is to be read in a corrupted passage of Suidas (s.v. πλΪγων), it would appear that the former treated Jewish history at greater length than Phlegon; also that Justus dilated upon the morality and other virtues of the Jews, whereas Josephus, according to Suidas, aimed to give the Greeks no offense. In Diogenes Laertius (ii. 5, § 41) is a quotation from Justus' chronicle in the form of an anecdote concerning Plato at the trial of Socrates. It would seem, then, that Photius had seen only an extract from the chronicle. If Justus arranged his book in the form of a royal genealogy (ἐν τοῖς στέμμασιν), he may have written objectionably of the Herodians. His remark about Plato seems to show that he shared the Hellenistic belief that Greek wisdom was borrowed from the Jews. Schlatter believes that even Josephus made use of Justus' work in his "Antiquities." Jerome (l.c.) mentions a third work by Justus, a short commentary on the Scriptures; but nothing further is known of it.

From this site.

Fortuna

Yes, I remember reading that Taylor had been imprisoned over somethings, but I did not remember exactly what or why.

I also remember that Diegesis was either partly or entirely, penned during one of his confinements.


Point taken. But, as I remember, even Photius himself was taken back by the fact that there was no mention of Jesus. In and of itself it is not of much coonsequence, but when added with all the other factors, I am getting more suspicious. (While I'm still not convinced about the MJ hypothesis, what it does tell me is that the HJ was not as well known as some would have us believe.)


Obviously I cannot disagree with your point here. But, I think that an Christian -> Essene/Therapeut connection is a much more likely scenario than the idea of Connie & Eusibius inventing Christianity out of whole cloth. You are correct inthat a lot of epigraphic and archeology has to be ignored or explained away to buy into that.

The Apollonius of Tyana cast as Jesus makes no sense at all to me. One thing that is certain is that the Christian scriptures extensively use Hebrew scripture, there is little doubt that both Paul and Jesus are casted into a very Jewish background. While some might point out that there is considerable Hellenistic material in the NT scriptures, Judaism itself had already by this time been duly influenced by Hellenistic ideas, and writers like Philo were carrying it further. This alone could account for the Hellenistic influence we see therem as well as that the NT is written in greek. Words carry baggage with them. Example, while hades is a good approximation of sheoul to a greek audience, the target audience will unintentionally interpret it with all that hades may mean to them.


Thanks for the comments.

mountainman

Zero archeological or epigraphic evidence need be ignored
Here is a thread discussing this claim quite specifically...
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=168491
archeological evidence for pre-Nicaean christianity?

That there existed pre-Nicaean christians is an inference
drawn from the pen of Eusebius which has zero archeological
evidence and zero epigraphic evidence to support it.

To be fair, we have listed and discussed any exceptions raised
at this index of exceptions, if you are aware of any others, now
is the time to speak up and illuminate other minds.
http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/article_070.htm



Pete Brown

mountainman

It appears to you to be absurd simply because your second
acknowledgement above is false. The Tacitus reference to
the existence and specific events which relate to "christians"
did not appear in Tacitus in fact, in the 1st century.

The references to "christians" were all inserted into the patristic
literature (such as Josephus) in the fourth century, or later,
in order that the inference that there were christians prior to
Nicaea, might be "bloated with the will to believe".

Elsewhere, in a thread entitled
archeological evidence for pre-Nicaean christianity?
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=168491
it appears there is none.


Pete Brown

Fortuna

MountainMan,

Apologies for the lateness of this reply ( I just now saw it looking through the archives). Anyway, you said ;


What I don't see mentioned in this list is the Alexandros inscription. I think that Roger and I were discussing it in some other thread, and he was telling me that it is no longer at the museum on the Palatine hill in Rome. But, I had seen it there just a few years ago.

Here is a U Chicago website about it.

This is said to be from the second century found on the Palatine. The UC website says that it is currently " in the Palatine Antiquarium Museum".

Fortuna

PS - Actually, I was looking for your list of Christian persecution cleanup of pagan stuff attributed to "Annihilate Them". (still looking for it).

aa5874

Jesus Christ did not write one single word of doctrine for his followers. Nothing at all from the Christ has been found, no memorabilia, nothing whatsoever. The greatest 'leader' vanishes without a trace.

Jesus Christ was claimed to be brilliant at about the age of 12, yet in his time on earth, he never wrote a sinlge word. Such a person cannot start a religion, such a person is a fable.