How mythicists are perceived by students and academics

[ficino]

If you want a conduit linking the author of Luke to Josephus prior to his writings, this is it.

And it is solid.

Festus assumed power in A.D. 60. He sent Paul off to Rome in late A.D. 60.

ACTS ends abruptly with Paul being in Rome for 2 years, which would be A.D. 63.

Josephus was in Rome in A.D. 63, and a famous man.

I appreciate your tortured speculations, but this is a very reasonable way for the author of Luke to have mistaken the stories of the famous Josephus, the emissary from Jerusalem, with stories of Jesus- which he had been collecting.

Ismael, the Second Temple High Priest, was also in Rome at that time after RESIGNING the High Priest's position- in A.D. 61- to "hangout" in Poppea's salon.

If I had a time machine, A.D. 63 in Rome is one of the places I would want to visit.

source Hagan, "Fires of Rome"

I have seen you post this on here, steve, but in the many academic publications I've read on Josephus and passages about Jesus in the Josephan text, I have not seen scholars conclude that the writer of Luke/Acts was in Rome together with Josephus in or around 63 and got information directly from Josephus (and even from one or two priests). Are there credentialed ancient historians, publishing in refereed venues, who endorse this hypothesis?

[Clive]

Someone mention shipwrecks?

On Mount Olympus, Zeus sends Hermes to rescue Odysseus from Calypso. Hermes persuades Calypso to let Odysseus build a ship and leave. The homesick hero sets sail, but when Poseidon, god of the sea, finds him sailing home, he sends a storm to wreck Odysseus’s ship. Poseidon has harbored a bitter grudge against Odysseus since the hero blinded his son, the Cyclops Polyphemus, earlier in his travels. Athena intervenes to save Odysseus from Poseidon’s wrath, and the beleaguered king lands at Scheria, home of the Phaeacians. Nausicaa, the Phaeacian princess, shows him to the royal palace, and Odysseus receives a warm welcome from the king and queen. When he identifies himself as Odysseus, his hosts, who have heard of his exploits at Troy, are stunned. They promise to give him safe passage to Ithaca, but first they beg to hear the story of his adventures.

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/odyssey/summary.html

[steve43]

If you want a conduit linking the author of Luke to Josephus prior to his writings, this is it.

And it is solid.

Festus assumed power in A.D. 60. He sent Paul off to Rome in late A.D. 60.

ACTS ends abruptly with Paul being in Rome for 2 years, which would be A.D. 63.

Josephus was in Rome in A.D. 63, and a famous man.

I appreciate your tortured speculations, but this is a very reasonable way for the author of Luke to have mistaken the stories of the famous Josephus, the emissary from Jerusalem, with stories of Jesus- which he had been collecting.

Ismael, the Second Temple High Priest, was also in Rome at that time after RESIGNING the High Priest's position- in A.D. 61- to "hangout" in Poppea's salon.

If I had a time machine, A.D. 63 in Rome is one of the places I would want to visit.

source Hagan, "Fires of Rome"

I have seen you post this on here, steve, but in the many academic publications I've read on Josephus and passages about Jesus in the Josephan text, I have not seen scholars conclude that the writer of Luke/Acts was in Rome together with Josephus in or around 63 and got information directly from Josephus (and even from one or two priests). Are there credentialed ancient historians, publishing in refereed venues, who endorse this hypothesis?

Not that I am aware of.

When I read Hagan, I read the passages in Josephus and ACTS that are involved to verify it myself- though Hagan reprints texts liberally from the original sources.

I think it is a valid question- why don't "mainstream" scholars verify this- or are they even aware of the connection?

In fact, that is a VERY interesting question.

Of course, if you are trying to specifically debunk Luke/Acts- and Christianity in general-, that is the LAST bit of information that you would want to bring to public light.

[ficino]

Of course, if you are trying to specifically debunk Luke/Acts- and Christianity in general-, that is the LAST bit of information that you would want to bring to public light.

OK, but why say this? I don't think most mainstream scholars are trying to debunk Luke/Acts, though they may not agree with a date pre-64.

[steve43]

There is debunking by commission and debunking by omission.

[perseusomega9]

man, if they only just read Hagan

[PhilosopherJay]

Hi Steve43,


Above is the Festus coin. According tohttp://munzeo.com/coin/jewish-procurato ... h-11960573:

Bronze Prutah minted by Porcius Festus.Obverse: Greek letters NEP WNO C (Nero) in wreath tied at the bottom with an X.Reverse: Greek letters KAICAPOC (Caesar) and date LE (year 5 = 58/59 A.D), palm branch.Recent scholarship by Ya'akov Meshorer indicates that "Festus apparently assumed office in 59 CE. His only issue ... was struck immediately upon his arrival in Judaea."

Ya'akov Meshorer (http://www.muenzgeschichte.ch/downloads ... shorer.pdf received his B.A. in archaeology, his M.S. in Classical Archaeology and his Ph.D in Numismatics in 1971 from the University in Jerusalem:

Meshorer established the Department of Numismatics at The Israel Museum,
Jerusalem, in 1969 and stood at its helm until 1993. The department, built up from
individual coins, collections, and funds donated to the Museum through Meshorer’s
tireless efforts, now holds one of the most important collections of ancient Jewish
coins in the world, as well as an impressive collection of Islamic gold coins and a
significant group of Roman city coins of Palestine. Meshorer was particularly dedicated
to the task of locating important Jewish coins and acquiring them for the collection,
and he successfully assembled the best specimens of this group. Over the years, he
also mounted numerous numismatic exhibitions, providing the general public and visitors
to Israel the opportunity to view important coins and to learn about their rich past. In
addition to his role as Curator of Numismatics, Meshorerw as Chief Curator of the
Archaeology Wing of the Israel Museum from 1975 to 1982, and from 1990 to 1996.
He retired from the Israel Museum in 2000.
Ya‘akov Meshorer contributed greatly to the development of numismatics as an
important archaeological discipline, and he helped promote the study of ancient
coins as an academic field in Israel. He was a lecturer at the Institute of Archaeology,
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and was appointed Professor of Numismatics in 1983...
Meshorer’s passion for coins and boundless intellectual curiosity are notable in his
many publications (19 books and more than 100 articles).His publications on Jewish coins
struck in ancient Palestine, and his interpretation of the subjects have become fundamental
in the field. His work Ancient Jewish Coinage (1982) and the updated edition A Treasury of Jewish Coins
(2001) include the entire group of coins struck by Jewish leaders over a period of five hundred
years. The books contain a detailed discussion of the motifs appearing on the coins,
some of which had never been published before.

This coin indicates it was minted in the 5th year of the reign of Nero. Nero's reign started October 13, 54 AD. The fifth year would be October 13, 58 to October 13, 59.
Since Meshorer tells us that it was minted in 58/59 and Festus was procurator in 59 (or possibly earlier) do you have any good reason to doubt him and continue to say that Festus only came in 60?

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

If you want a conduit linking the author of Luke to Josephus prior to his writings, this is it.

And it is solid.

Festus assumed power in A.D. 60. He sent Paul off to Rome in late A.D. 60.

ACTS ends abruptly with Paul being in Rome for 2 years, which would be A.D. 63.

Josephus was in Rome in A.D. 63, and a famous man.

I appreciate your tortured speculations, but this is a very reasonable way for the author of Luke to have mistaken the stories of the famous Josephus, the emissary from Jerusalem, with stories of Jesus- which he had been collecting.

Ismael, the Second Temple High Priest, was also in Rome at that time after RESIGNING the High Priest's position- in A.D. 61- to "hangout" in Poppea's salon.

If I had a time machine, A.D. 63 in Rome is one of the places I would want to visit.

source Hagan, "Fires of Rome"

[steve43]

I re-read Hagan and the original material.

With Festus assuming power in late A.D. 59, you can still put Paul in Rome in A.D. 61. There are time gaps in Acts. When did Festus arrive in Judea after being appointed by Nero? How long was it after Festus knew he had protect Paul in Caesarea after the "trial" in front of the Chief Priests was it before Agrippa II and Bernice came to Caesarea? How long after Paul's appearance in front of Agrippa was if before he was actually sent aboard a ship? We know that at least a winter passed before Paul arrived in Rome. Another consideration is this- how long was Paul in Rome knocking around staying with fellow Christians before he finally got his own apartment and "stayed" there for two years?
Paul could have arrive in A.D. 61, got his apartment in A.D. 62, and Acts ended in A.D. 64, which fits better with both Paul and the author of Luke?Acts dying in the persecutions of Nero on mid-late A.D. 64.

So a lot of fun speculation here.

The most interesting thing that I found, that Hagan didn;t appreciate, was that Josephus was in his 26th year in A.D. 62, not A.D. 63. Now, he might have stayed over the winter and captured a part of A.D. 63 in his stay, but he would have been definitely there in A.D. 62.

Count it out yourself, with his first year of life being A.D. 37.

This is just more overlap that supports the hypothesis that stories about Josephus- a famous man representing the Jewish aristocrats- got mixed up with stories of Jesus as Luke wrote his gospel.

[PhilosopherJay]

Hi Steve43,
The time gaps in Acts do not permit that much delay. It is very explicit that Paul was judged within three weeks of Festus' arrival in Judea.

25 Three days after Festus had become governor, he went from Caesarea to Jerusalem. 2 There the chief priests and some Jewish leaders told him about their charges against Paul. They also asked Festus 3 if he would be willing to bring Paul to Jerusalem. They begged him to do this because they were planning to attack and kill Paul on the way. 4 But Festus told them, “Paul will be kept in Caesarea, and I am soon going there myself. 5 If he has done anything wrong, let your leaders go with me and bring charges against him there.”

6 Festus stayed in Jerusalem for eight or ten more days before going to Caesarea. Then the next day he took his place as judge and had Paul brought into court. 7 As soon as Paul came in, the Jewish leaders from Jerusalem crowded around him and said he was guilty of many serious crimes. But they could not prove anything. 8 Then Paul spoke in his own defense, “I have not broken the Law of my people. And I have not done anything against either the temple or the Emperor.”...

13 A few days later King Agrippa and Bernice came to Caesarea to visit Festus. 14 They had been there for several days, when Festus told the king about the charges against Paul. He said:

Felix left a man here in jail, 15 and when I went to Jerusalem, the chief priests and the Jewish leaders came and asked me to find him guilty. 16 I told them that it isn’t the Roman custom to hand a man over to people who are bringing charges against him. He must first have the chance to meet them face to face and to defend himself against their charges.

17 So when they came here with me, I wasted no time. On the very next day I took my place on the judge’s bench and ordered him to be brought in. 18 But when the men stood up to make their charges against him, they did not accuse him of any of the crimes that I thought they would. 19 Instead, they argued with him about some of their beliefs and about a dead man named Jesus, who Paul said was alive.

20 Since I did not know how to find out the truth about all this, I asked Paul if he would be willing to go to Jerusalem and be put on trial there. 21 But Paul asked to be kept in jail until the Emperor could decide his case. So I ordered him to be kept here until I could send him to the Emperor.

22 Then Agrippa said to Festus, “I would also like to hear what this man has to say.”

Festus answered, “You can hear him tomorrow.”

23 The next day Agrippa and Bernice made a big show as they came into the meeting room. High ranking army officers and leading citizens of the town were also there. Festus then ordered Paul to be brought in 24 and said:

Two weeks after Festus arrives, he puts Paul on trial. "A few days later" Agrippa and Bernice shows up. "They had been there for several days" when Festus brings up Paul. The next day Paul appears before Agrippa and Bernice. Thus we have approximately three weeks between the time Festus comes and Paul goes on trial before King Agrippa and Bernice.

Acts 26:28 Agrippa asked Paul, “In such a short time do you think you can talk me into being a Christian?”

29 Paul answered, “Whether it takes a short time or a long time, I wish you and everyone else who hears me today would become just like me! Except, of course, for these chains.”

30 Then King Agrippa, Governor Festus, Bernice, and everyone who was with them got up. 31 But before they left, they said, “This man isn’t guilty of anything. He doesn’t deserve to die or to be put in jail.”

32 Agrippa told Festus, “Paul could have been set free, if he had not asked to be tried by the Roman Emperor.”

Since King Agrippa has declared Paul innocent and said that he doesn't deserve to die or to be put on jail, it is hard to imagine that Festus having just arrived on the job and wanting to establish a friendship with Agrippa and Bernice, should not send Paul off to Rome as soon as possible.

27 When it was time for us to sail to Rome, Captain Julius from the Emperor’s special troops was put in charge of Paul and the other prisoners. 2 We went aboard a ship from Adramyttium that was about to sail to some ports along the coast of Asia. Aristarchus from Thessalonica in Macedonia sailed on the ship with us.

3 The next day we came to shore at Sidon. Captain Julius was very kind to Paul. He even let him visit his friends, so they could give him whatever he needed.

Ships sailed from the sea port of Caesarea constantly. The text does not tell us that any length of time ensued between the trial and the shipping. It is hard to imagine that Festus would keep Paul, an innocent man, in jail for more than a month before shipping him to Rome. Therefore we may assume that Paul leaves for Rome within two months of Festus' arrival.

In Acts 27, we read:

8 We went slowly along the coast and finally reached a place called Fair Havens, not far from the town of Lasea.

9 By now we had already lost a lot of time, and sailing was no longer safe. In fact, even the Great Day of Forgiveness[a] was past.

The day of Atonement would have been in late September. It was generally considered unsafe to sail after October. We may suppose that it took them two months to get to Lasea on Crete, this should have been done in three weeks. It appears that Paul left in July or early August.

Now, the coin that Festus produced says year 5, (Oct 58-Oct 59) on it. However, coins were made by hand, and although at some mints 20,000 coins could be produced in a single day, it is likely that the manufacturing of the coins, which could be in the millions, would take at least several months to complete. In general, they would issue coins manufacture and issue coins early in the year, or even the previous year. If Festus had arrived in October of 59, the coins would have been dated year 6, as that is when they would have been issued. Really, the latest he could have arrived in Judea and started minting the coins for year 5 would have been June of 59. The coins would have been ready for release possibly in August or September of 59. This is extremely late in the year to be issuing year 5 coins.
If Paul left in late July or early August. That means the arrival of Festus was June or July 59. Paul's arrival in Rome would have been five to six months later in Dec 59 or January 60.
The question is would Festus have been able to organize the minting and distribution of the coins between June and September 59. This is a mere four months. Would he really have released coins saying year 5 in the rule of Nero in the 11th or 12th month of that year?

It seems merely possible, but it seems more likely that Festus would have arrived in June 58 and sent his prison ship off in July 58. This would have given him plenty of time to organize the minting and distributing of year 5 coins. They would have been ready to be released in October of 58.

If Paul arrived in Dec-Jan 58/60 or Dec-Jan 59/60. we still have the mystery of why there was no trial for two years, while Paul was allegedly preaching at Rome. Certainly, with King Agrippa's endorsement of his innocent he should have been tried and released within a few months of his arrival at Rome,

We also have the chronological problem with the Josephus text. The priests he talks about were sent by Felix, so they must have arrived many months before Paul, if not years before. Why are they still awaiting trial in Josephus' 26th year - 62. They would have been in Rome 2 1/2 to 5 years before this time. It is difficult to imagine Roman justice being this slow. Remember, Jesus was taken to Pilate's house at daybreak 5-6 AM, and Pilate with no advance preparation whatsoever gave him justice and had him crucified by 9 A.M. (according to Mark's gospel).

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

[steve43]

What Bible translation are you using?

I disagree with the "after a few days" quotation in your source. Mind says "after certain days" which is very nebulous and can mean a great deal of time.

And there are other issues.

But I think you are dancing around things here.