J-D

They contain some statements which are not historically true: that does not settle the question of how much of their contents are historically true; it leaves that question open.

jakejonesiv

You should pay attention now, so you can use it in your future posts. ;-)

archibald

Hi Jake,

As to the first question, I do not know.

Similary in principle, why do others not mention certain things, why does Philo not mention Jesus? That's another one which crops up. I don't know why they didn't. In Philo's case, I don't think he mentions any Judean preachers/prophets so, should we expect him to name this one? As to Tacitus, I am not familiar with whether we should expect them to mention him. Such questions as 'did they have his works?' or 'did they mention any other Roman historians?' come to mind initially.

As such, I do not know. Why do you think they didn't?

Interpolation is one possibility. What's the evidence for this? I believe the passage is written in the style of Tacitus, and refers disparagingly to Christians. Maybe this is a decoy, do you think?

I presume the general question of Christians being in Rome in the 1st C. is not particulary doubted, what with Paul writing to them? If so, what indication do we have that they believed anything other than what Tacitus' text says?

Isn't Tacitus story echoed by Suetonius, and Josephus?

Crucifixion by Pilate, of course, would be consistent with the gospels, so in a sense, Tacitus, Josephus and Suetonius only seem to confirm what is already stated elsewhere. So, there does appear to be a reasonable amount of corroboration involved.

If you suspect interpolation, are you thinking partial or wholesale?

Regarding your second question, no, I was not aware of when Tacitus' name was linked to the passage by name. Was it mentioned, though not by name, before that? Who, incidentally was the first?

More interestingly, was a different version of the passage, say wthout reference to Pilate, ever referenced? Are there any extant versions which omit it?

It is true that I am not the best person to make a call on this one. I would prefer an ancient historian, familiar with Tacitus, to be here. I bear this in mind when considering all such things generally, and while I don't want to be accused of using an argument from authority, I do notice that there appears to be consensus from scholars, and as far as I am aware from historians, that the passage may be considered more likely authentic, and because of my own limitations, I admit this is in the back of my mind, though I do not attach undue weight to it, since they could be wrong. But, I am happy to have a go here, on my own. :]

As with any piece of the evidential puzzle, I am prepared to speculate about authenticity, but I am not sure if I should opt for non-authenticity, in this case, until you give me a good argument.

Maybe you now will.

mountainman

Hey dog-on,

I'd have to question the bedrock nature of a manuscript that first appeared in the literature during the 15th century, amidst assessment of forgery. Dont you think the 15th century is a little late for evidence of an HJ?

Best wishes



Pete

Toto

It is doubted. There is a current thread on whether Paul's letter was originally written to the Romans, or to some other city's church. The Tacitus passage is doubted - you will find some prior threads on this.

Not by Josephus.

Or a common editor who made sure that they agreed. . .

mountainman

It's called making a list of the evidence for discussion. Items 1 - 10 are genuine items of evidence used today to support the HJ position that are not seen as ridiculous. Items 11 onward are a little ridiculous, but can be ignored for the purposes of discussion the real evidence listed at 1 to 10, and which might be extended by those who are able.

andrewcriddle

The first reference to the Tacitus passage about Nero's persecution of Christians is the rewrite in the Chronicle of Sulpicius Severus c 400 CE.

Andrew Criddle

mountainman

See The Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus/Part 2/Section 1 (1912) by Arthur Drews, translated by Joseph McCabe

Toto

Mod note: this thread is becoming unwieldy and is incorporating a variety of new topics. Please consider starting a new thread for a new topic, or requesting a split.

MCalavera

Mod power to the rescue.