There is some validity to the Criteria of Embarrassment, Nimz. Had a xtian forged Josephus it would have read more like the gospels and less like a vindication of Josephus' patrons, the Flavian family. There would have been more than the brief Testimoniam Flavianum about their boy. The secondary reference in Book XX seems like a minor error or perhaps a case of xtian wishful-thinking: They saw the word "christos" and desperately wanted to believe that it was a reference to their boy.
I know a guy from other boards who insists that all references to xtians are 4th century or later forgeries....including Pliny. But the Criteria of Embarrassment* argues in favor of authenticity at least as far as a xtian forger would be concerned. Pliny writes to Trajan:
*The criterion of embarrassment, also known as criterion of dissimilarity, is an analytical tool that Biblical scholars use in assessing whether the New Testament's accounts of Jesus' actions and words are historically probable. Simply put, trust the embarrassing material. If something is awkward for an author to say and he does anyway, it is more likely to be true.
I know a guy from other boards who insists that all references to xtians are 4th century or later forgeries....including Pliny. But the Criteria of Embarrassment* argues in favor of authenticity at least as far as a xtian forger would be concerned. Pliny writes to Trajan:
Quote:Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.What xtian would write that? They were working up a whole phony history of xtian martyrs gladly going to their deaths for dear ole jesus and some asshole suddenly writes that when faced with torture they said "fuck that.....Hail Caesar!"
*The criterion of embarrassment, also known as criterion of dissimilarity, is an analytical tool that Biblical scholars use in assessing whether the New Testament's accounts of Jesus' actions and words are historically probable. Simply put, trust the embarrassing material. If something is awkward for an author to say and he does anyway, it is more likely to be true.
