09-30-2009, 11:32 PM | #1 | |||
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Concurrent histories or histories near the lifetime of Christ
in determining the historical Christ based on empirical evidence, using that term loosely, we are left with the rather suspicious entry by Josephus, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3, who seemed to be a Roman profligate by the time he started writing,
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It would be ironic if both contemporaneous "histories" regarding the Christ were fraudulent, and we were left with no contemporaneous record that he even lived.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα Last edited by Archaea; 09-30-2009 at 11:56 PM. |
|||
09-30-2009, 11:43 PM | #2 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
For those more astute than I, meaning most, the "text" by Josephus is not believed to be authentic because of the declaration by "Josephus" for Christ to be the Christ. It's based on a more contemporary citation by Origen, who as a Christian would have cited if it had been extant at the time. And Josephus may have referred to Christ in his reference to the death of James. From what I remember, Eusebius is believed by some at least to have been the author of the Christ passages within Josephus. Naturally, my summary distill very complex analyses of word analysis and style evaluation, as well as a comparison of Eusebius's style.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα Last edited by Archaea; 10-01-2009 at 12:03 AM. |
Bookmarks |
|
|