|
Post by sandwiches on Aug 25, 2013 16:40:42 GMT
Seems to be a bit of an onslaught on Josephus in the internet Jesus Mythers community? There was Carrier's article on the reference to the passage on James (which according to the author - if no-one else - pretty well disposed of the authenticity of that reference - Carrier also disposed of the Testimonium in passing). But they seem also determined to attack the reference in Josephus to John the Baptist. This appeared on Vridar: vridar.org/2013/08/24/so-john-the-baptist-was-interpolated-into-josephus-one-more-argument-for-the-forgery-case/ So John the Baptist was interpolated into Josephus? One more argument for the forgery caseThe reference to John the Baptist in Josephus makes no direct allusion to Jesus, so why the desire to discredit that reference? Any suggestions?
|
|
|
Post by fortigurn on Aug 26, 2013 0:16:39 GMT
The idea seems to be that undermining the historicity of John the Baptist further undermines the historicity of Jesus and validates Mytherist claims of forgery when confronted by inconvenient historical records.
|
|
|
Post by ignorantianescia on Aug 26, 2013 5:43:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sandwiches on Aug 26, 2013 16:20:27 GMT
Thanks for the responses. I suppose the mention of John the Baptist and his custom of baptism in Josephus might be seen as corroboration of the gospel accounts of John the Baptist. The McGrath article is interesting; I will read up on it. One can only wonder that the late Geza Vermes saw the Josephus accounts as illuminating, while lesser lights on the internet go to such extraordinary lengths to claim they are interpolations.
|
|
|
Post by wraggy on Nov 10, 2013 3:02:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ignorantianescia on Nov 10, 2013 7:49:21 GMT
"Long-form birth certificate," I bet they'll say.
Nir's views seem to have to be related to a concern for a too heterogeneous Judaism at the time.
|
|