The First Century Void

[RoadRunner79]

Where do you see that in chapter 42?  It seems a stretch, to connect your quote cited, with the unquoted part.  Where is he complaining that there is no historical mention of Jesus?

Seems to me, that moreso, he is complaining about the difficulty of debating history with the selective hyperskeptic, and those who throw the baby out with the bath water. Apt for the discussion, but not for the reasons you imply.

Well then look into book 2, ch 33 maybe it'll make you clearer that Origen never ever encountered TF http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04162.htm
there Celsus asks him what miracles Jesus performed, Origen answers that Jesus' life was indeed full of striking and miraculous events, "but from what other source can we can furnish an answer than from the Gospel narratives?"

Origen could have quoted TF which contains: "...for he was a doer of wonderful works... as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him". But since he never heard of TF he stated only the Gospels.

Not just that but back in book 1 ch 47 he claims that Josephus never mentioned Jesus "Antiquities of the Jews" (the very same book that today contains TF) because he was a Jew:

For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless— being, although against his will, not far from the truth— that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),— the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice.

And yet in TF Josephus apparently had no problem to say that it was because of Jews that Jesus was hanged, from TF: And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross

Where do you see that in chapter 42?  It seems a stretch, to connect your quote cited, with the unquoted part.  Where is he complaining that there is no historical mention of Jesus?

Seems to me, that moreso, he is complaining about the difficulty of debating history with the selective hyperskeptic, and those who throw the baby out with the bath water. Apt for the discussion, but not for the reasons you imply.

Well then look into book 2, ch 33 maybe it'll make you clearer that Origen never ever encountered TF http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04162.htm
there Celsus asks him what miracles Jesus performed, Origen answers that Jesus' life was indeed full of striking and miraculous events, "but from what other source can we can furnish an answer than from the Gospel narratives?"

Origen could have quoted TF which contains: "...for he was a doer of wonderful works... as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him". But since he never heard of TF he stated only the Gospels.

Not just that but back in book 1 ch 47 he claims that Josephus never mentioned Jesus "Antiquities of the Jews" (the very same book that today contains TF) because he was a Jew:

For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless— being, although against his will, not far from the truth— that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),— the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice.

And yet in TF Josephus apparently had no problem to say that it was because of Jews that Jesus was hanged, from TF: And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross

And yet the TF would not have answered his question... and even then, it's still quite difficult to make a case from silence. Just because he may have read something, doesn't mean he may recall or think to use it in every circumstance. I'm sure people have read a lot better arguments, then what I'm seeing here. But kudos for providing me something!