SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Should God be replaced?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Scott Bergquist who wrote (8642)12/10/2001 7:44:22 AM
From: briskit  Read Replies (1) of 28931
 
Your response shows I didn't make my point clear at all. The textual evidence is significant establishing the existence of Jesus, and the early appearance of the interpretation by those close to him that he was the Jewish messiah. You don't have to believe the interpretation that he was the messiah. There is no comparison to Mithra or Santa that makes a difference about the extant evidence and development of the interpretation. My point is that someone has noted textual interpolations and insertions in other literature, then gone to Josephus and asserted the same about the Jesus passages. That does not make it so. I mentioned a scholar saying it has never been successfully defended. The point about Jesus followers was not a truth claim. I didn't say their claims made it true. Simply that Jesus was not a marquee name in his lifetime. He was not big news. He was from a backwater town with a few ragtag followers, fisherman, etc. Who would write about that? It was due to his death, and subsequent to his death, that note was made of him. It was due to the followers that his name became noted at all, in order to explain about the followers. None of that means the claims are true about what his life meant. It means I do not expect to see court historians to show concern about him. I am very comfortable with the evidence and evaluating it factually. It would not matter if the Josephus account never existed. I just disagree that there are solid textual reasons to remove the sections. Even so, whether Jesus was the Jewish messiah does not rest on Josephus or Tacitus.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News