(February 3, 2016 at 7:21 am)robvalue Wrote: Right. If we just believe any testimony is likely to be true at points where it appears to be embarrassing, without further evidence, we're in a very strange position.
I could go ahead and write some stuff now which appears to embarrass me. Will it be true in 2000 years, if little else from the era survives for comparison?
To me, we've got far more reasons to think these people made things up and weren't particularly interested in historical accuracy. But this is just my opinion. We are only dealing in probabilities.
Given the time Mark was probably firs written (at the time of the first Jewish revolt), and Jesus' action man portrayal therein, I wouldn't be too suprised if the crucifixion was an aggrandising event rather than an embarrassing one. The authors could have been saying 'look at our leader, he died for your freedom'. Many men have started their road to glory only after a violent death, after all.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home