Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Reading Eisler's John the Baptist and Messiah Jesus, while making a case for the Acts of Pilate to be real and Eusebius' response via doctoring Josephus he writes : The Christian apologists could then do nothing else than fabricate a chronological argument by converting-a trifling change indeed !-t...

This thread is a response to interesting recent discussion's about Josephus Pilate Luke 3:1 ans other matters. However I am trying to answer a specific point. Can we determine when Luke understood the crucifixion to have occurred without relying on either our present text of 3:1 or our present text...

FYI, James Tabor has an interesting article examining whether the the picture below are the remains of Antigonus. AbbaNailJaw.jpg https://jamestabor.com/the-abba-cave-crucifixion-nails-and-the-last-hasmonean-king/ Lots of controversy over the Abba Cave.... I have a copy of the article mentioned by ...

Why Pilate? Pilate is connected with a crucifixion in Josephus, Slavonic Josephus, Acts of Pilate (Eusebius) Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Dating Pilate early, 18/19 c.e. to 36/37 c.e. gives a range of years of about 18 or 19. If the gospel figure of Jesus is a historical figure then this range of ...

This thread is a response to interesting recent discussion's about Josephus Pilate Luke 3:1 ans other matters. However I am trying to answer a specific point. Can we determine when Luke understood the crucifixion to have occurred without relying on either our present text of 3:1 or our present text...

Can you point to any Christians who didn't think that Jesus lived at the time of Pilate? Stephan, I already told you that belief is not a concern of mine. If every christian who had ever lived believed that the gospel Jesus was a flesh and blood historical figure crucified under Pilate, that belief...

all Christians thought Jesus lived at the time of Pilate This is the starting point. Your POV assumes on some level that this 'belief' was delusional or mistaken. I am not sure you can come up with any persuasive arguments to help us ignore the beliefs of the first people acquainted with the messag...

StephenGoranson wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:29 am

I did read that assertion, but was unpersuaded.

OK - that puts up on a similar footing as I'm unpersuaded by the assertion for a historical flesh and blood gospel Jesus crucified under Pilate.

I may have missed something, but I think the question--"Why can't there be both a literary gospel Jesus and a historical Jesus crucified under Pilate?"--still stands. For example, perhaps we can agree, Alexander the Great was historical, and there are literary tales about him. I think you missed so...

Indeed, it all boils down to which interpretation one fancies. That is one reason I prefer, as far as possible, to give interpretation a wide birth. My interpretation is better than your interpretation only paves the way for discord. One can never know what meaning a gospel writer was trying to con...