(July 2, 2018 at 6:36 pm)JairCrawford Wrote:(July 2, 2018 at 6:28 pm)Minimalist Wrote: What is the bigger leap? The original tale had no nativity story...neither does the last, BTW...but the two fanfics do and they disagree with each other extensively. Which was it? The one from 4-6 BC where Herod the great is alive or the one from 6 AD where Quirinius is presiding over an absurd world wide census that never happened? These are your problems. I am convinced that these xtian writers were simply making shit up for their respective groups.
And as far as Josephus is concerned not a single writer not xtian or pagan ever refers to that forgery prior to the 4th century... Including Origen who specifically cites book 18 of Antiquities and says that Josephus does not know Christ.
The TF has been resurrected (pun intended) for the same reason it was originally forged. Jesus freaks are embarrassed that their boy made no mark on history.
To answer that, both accounts would have to be looked at for their similarities and differences. If a common kernel can be found to be plausible, then the entire account can't be asserted to be factually fabricated with total certainty.
Keep in mind, it was custom for the contemporary Jews during the time of Jesus to memorize liturgy orally and recite it. It is plausible that this same thing applied to the early forms of what became parts of the gospels, thus a source for passing down the nativity account among other things.
What did Origen mean by that? Is he implying that Josephus didn't know who Jesus was at all? Or that he didn't -know- Him? As in, Josephus wasn't a Christian (which makes sense because we know Josephus was Jewish)? I'm genuinely asking as I need to do more reading on the argument from silence regarding the Testimonium.
I'll have to look up Contra Celsus for you a little later.
Its not an argument from silence. It is a forgery.
