The First Century Void

[RoadRunner79]

The conspiracy theory that you are proposing, is that Eusebius need a source that he didn't have, so he forged one into Josephus, cited it, and then no one noticed (or was silent concerning it) and he somehow got rid of all other copies. My tin foil hat is currently in the wash... but you will need to make a better case, to convince me of this tale.

It did not exist before Eusebius and then it did.  Cui Bono, as the lawyers say "who benefits."  It is not as if Eusebius has any reputation for integrity.  He was an early church propagandist.  Sort of the Kellyanne Conway of his day.

But as I said earlier there is no convincing you because you desperately do not want to be convinced.  As the saying goes, "you can lead a jackass to water but you can't make him drink."

Eusebius' talent for lying extends to the so-called epistles of Ignatius of Antioch.  Back in 2007, Herr Von Popenfuhrer, taking a break from diddling little boys, I imagine, stood in front of a crowd and said:

Eusebius writes: "The Report says that he [Ignatius] was sent from Syria to Rome, and became food for wild beasts on account of his testimony to Christ. And as he made the journey through Asia under the strictest military surveillance" (he called the guards "ten leopards" in his Letter to the Romans, 5:1), "he fortified the parishes in the various cities where he stopped by homilies and exhortations, and warned them above all to be especially on their guard against the heresies that were then beginning to prevail, and exhorted them to hold fast to the tradition of the Apostles".

https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/b1...hrch32.htm

So here is a guy who is being sent all the way from fucking Turkey to Rome to be executed - hint, the Romans were not that inefficient - under "strictest military surveillance" but those guards still allowed him to write and speak to other groups of (supposedly) illegal xtians?  The problem with someone like you, RR, is that you will look at that and say "yup, that's what the holy horseshitters said so it must be true...praise jebus." without a critical thought ever being allowed to form in your fucking head.  The situation described by "Eusebius" and later enshrined by the Panzer Pope is so utterly absurd as to be beyond belief.  But idiot jesus freaks fall for it hook, line and sinker.

I'd agree, that Eusebius was not the best historian (or theologian for that matter).  However I'm a little skeptical of your claims, in regards to him forging them.   Being the first record that we have as quoting them, it does not follow that he made it up whole cloth.  I don't think that your conspiracy theory is tenable without more evidence.  If we used your criteria of quoting before X date, and us having record of it;  how much of Josephus do we have that isn't forged?   Doesn't this narrative... suit your desires quite well?  Who benefits?

---

Yeah if Josephus considered Jesus so wonderful then why dedicate only few lines to him when whole pages are devoted to petty robbers and obscure seditious leaders? Nearly forty chapters are devoted to a single king.

And what is this

the mythicist position is silent until about the 18th century.....  

Can you switch off your delusion, take of your beer goggles for moment because did I not show you dialogues with Clesus who obviously thought Jesus was a myth? There where people that considered Jesus as a myth from the very beginnings, since Paul started preaching and he was very well aware that Jesus story is stupid and you can figure out it's just a myth by only thinking for he said that people should not think and actually be stupid and then they can believe Jesus really existed 1 Corinthians 3:18-19, "Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God."

Corinthians 4:10 "We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are wise in Christ";

1 Corinthians 1:19-21 "It is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart. Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom";

I think that you mis-understand what the mythicist position is. For instance Ehrman is certainly not on the side of Christianity, and he can be found in many places calling the mythiscist position foolish. And noting that no serious mythiscist holds a major teaching position in history or theology in any major university.

Where do you think that the Celcius expounds this position?   Also, a great deal is made, about only working from copies of copies, regarding the manuscripts here.  Here we don't even have that, but copies of copies of a response to letters that we don't have.  Are these evidence?