'While there is no doubt among the majority of scholars that the Testimonium has been tampered with (and thus the entire passage cannot be authentic), a decent number of scholars believe the Testimonium is based upon an authentic core. This quote is from an essay on the website of '': 'The Jesus of History: A Reply to Josh McDowell' by Gordon Stein, Ph.D.'Īlong with the essay are some editor's comments: In other words, it is a forgery, rejected by scholars." the vast majority of scholars since the early 1800s have said that this quotation is not by Josephus, but rather is a later Christian insertion in his works. His writings are, generally, respected as being of historical value.Įven so, it is not possible to prove that Josephus actually wrote these particular words and, at various times, experts have suggested that they may be later forged additions or adaptations. Josephus was a Jew not a Christian, so he was unbiased. This evidence, where Josephus mentions the 'wise man' Jesus, seems impressive. He could not have failed to quote the words of Josephus, whose writings he knew, had the passage existed in the genuine text.' Apparently Proving Jesus? The silence of Origen is still more significant. Such a testimony would certainly have been produced by Justin in his apology or in his controversy with Trypho the Jew, had it existed in the copies of Josephus at his time. 315) in two places but it was unknown to Justin Martyr (A. “This passage is first quoted by Eusebius (fl. Baring-Gould, author of 'Lost and Hostile Gospels' Every line proclaims it the work of a Christian writer.' And yet a ranker forgery was never penned. Remsberg, author of 'The Christ':įor nearly sixteen hundred years Christians have been citing this passage as a testimonial, not merely to the historical existence, but to the divine character of Jesus Christ. we have more evidence for Jesus than for almost anybody from his time period.' ? Because we don't have anything that exists, right, until after he died?'įinley: 'But we don't have any ancient records of anyone who wrote about Jesus while he was alive, do we?'Įhrman: 'Just as we don't have for billions of people, who lived in the past, but we're pretty sure existed. What hardcore evidence is there that Julius Caesar existed?. Reginald Finley: 'There really isn't any hardcore evidence, though. Here are some extracts from an interview, between Reginald Finley and Bart Ehrman, related to the March 2012 publication of Ehrman's book 'Did Jesus Exist?'.īart Ehrman: 'I don't think that there is any serious historian who doubts the existence of Jesus'. 'We have more evidence for Jesus than for almost anybody from his time period.' 'What hardcore evidence is there that Julius Caesar existed?' 'Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth' Harper Collins. Historians deal for the most part in probabilities, and some things are more probable than others.' (Kindle page 288)Įhrman, Bart D. It is far more certain that Julius Caesar fought the Gallic Wars (he wrote about them and we still have the books) than that Apollonius of Tyana raised a genuinely dead person back to life. some things are far more certain than others. ' Julius Caesar left us an account of the Gallic Wars.' (Kindle page 40). is there really much doubt.' (Kindle page 38). about a certain historical claim, for example, that Abraham Lincoln really did deliver the Gettysburg Address or that Julius Caesar really did cross the Rubicon. Just to set the record straight, yes, of course Bart Ehrman believes in Julius Caesar! In an interview, with Reginald Finley, concerning his new book, Ehrman said some (to me) rather surprising things.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |